Articles

Marquis de la Franquerie on Synarchy: Part 1

taken from Pontifical Infallibility, the Syllabus, the Condemnation of Modernism and the Current Crisis of the Church

CHAPTER IV – THE PLOT OF THE COUNTER-CHURCH

“We will penetrate to the very heart of this Pontifical Court from which nothing in the world will be able to chase us, until we have destroyed the power of the Pope. ”

17th Session of the Zionist Congress in Basel, 1897

Thus, God had given to the world – in addition to His grace, which never fails – the light enabling it to ensure its salvation. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, successively Pius VI, in his Allocution on the Martyrdom of Louis XVI; Gregory XVI, in all his teachings; Pius IX, in the Encyclical, Quanta Cura, followed by the first Syllabus; Leo XIII, in his admirable Encyclicals and in particular in Humanum Genus; Saint Pius X, in the Encyclical Pascendi, followed by the second Syllabus and in the Condemnation of “Sillon”; Pius XI, in his Encyclicals Divini Redemptoris on the inherently perverse communism and in Mit Brennender Sorge on Nazism; Pius XII, of holy memory, in the Encyclical Humani Generis and in its luminous Instructions of 31 May and 2 November 1954 to all the bishops of the world, had shown the peril and indicated the remedies.

Confirming the Pontifical Teachings, eminent prelates, such as Our Lords Delassus, Meurin and Jouin, of courageous and lucid historians like Léon de Poncins, Pierre Virion and Maurice Pinay, have proved the reality of the Luciferian Plan of domination of the Counter-Church over the world, that, for their part, the henchmen of Satan – because they considered themselves already as victorious – no longer feared to reveal little by little in their declarations and their writings1 – such as Stanislas de Guaïta, the ex-abbot Roca, Saint-Yves d’Alveydre, etc … and the Synarchy. All of this is confirmed by the “Protocols of the Sages of Zion ”, stolen at the end of the last century.2

Because we did not want to follow the Pontifical Teachings or believe the theologians and historians who denounced danger, the Church is currently going through the most serious crisis in its history.

To understand the causes, it is necessary to recall the plan of the Luciferian Occult Power and the Instructions and secrets of the Sects that fell into the hands of the Holy See and that Pius IX had published by Crétineau-Joly.3

Already, in the 18th Century, the chief of the Illuminati, the Jew Weishaup writes:

“Freemasons must exercise empire over men of all states, of all nations, of all religions, to dominate them without any external constraint, to keep them united by lasting bonds, to inspire them all with the same spirit, breathe the same spirit everywhere, in the greatest silence and with all possible activity, direct all men on earth for the same purpose. It is in the privacy of Secret Societies that you must know how to influence opinion.4

Maurice Talmeyr, in his pamphlet How we Form Opinion, describes the maneuver and its terrible effectiveness: 

“When men are ostensibly from a sect or from a school, when they recognize themselves to be one, “opinion” is warned against their esprit de corps, it is on guard. But men whom nothing shows are united between them, who do not themselves know if they are, but who think and judge the same about everything, these men achieve precisely what it is a question of achieving, that is, a consensus. An artificial consensus, a manufactured consensus, but which seems spontaneous and which impresses strongly.”

Weishaupt gives the slogan: make Christians believe that it is Our Lord Jesus Christ who was the great inventor of the Masonic trinomial: Freedom, Equality, Fraternity – that it was the very doctrine taught by Him, understood of course in the sense of the Sects.

“Our Doctrine,” he said, “is that divine doctrine as Jesus Christ taught His disciples, that which He gave them but developed the true meaning in his secret speeches5 … He taught all mankind how to come to the delivery … No one has opened up to freedom such sure paths as our Great Jesus of Nazareth … “

From Florence, on August 5, 1806, Simonini exposed to Abbé Barruel the Plan of the Occult Power, which one of his high dignitaries entrusted to him; the Abbot immediately communicated it to Pope Pius VII, who replied that he believed in its authenticity. Let us quote some main passages:

“ #4  That in our Italy alone, they had as supporters more than eight hundred ecclesiastics, both secular and regular, among whom many parish priests, public professors, prelates, a few bishops and a few cardinals, whom they did not did not despair of soon having a pope from their party;

“ #5  That similarly in Spain, they had a large number of partisans even among the clergy …

” #6 That the Bourbon Family was the greatest enemy, that in a few years they hoped to annihilate it …”

Shortly afterwards, the Heads of Haute-Vente (This appears to refer to the Alta Vendita) were to resume the fight with the same methods by inculcating in Christians that “Christianism is an essentially democratic doctrine” and by seducing them by equalitarianism and humanitarianism. A standing secret instruction, dated 1819, states:

“There is a thought that has always preoccupied men who aspire to universal regeneration: it is thought of the liberation (?) of Italy, from which must leave, on a determined day, the liberation (?) of the entire world: the fraternal republic and the harmony of humanity. But there is an obstacle, it is the Church, and this obstacle is formidable.”

Our final goal is that of Voltaire and that of the French Revolution, the annihilation of everything from Catholicism and even from the Christian idea…”

Then, the directives are given: to speak “without end on the dangers of fanaticism, on the happiness of social equality and on the great principles of religious freedom, against intolerance and persecution” and they conclude: “The law of social progress is here and all here; don’t bother to look elsewhere … “

And even :

What we must ask above all, what we must seek and expect, as the Jews await the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs…and with this, to break the rock on which God built His Church, we have the little finger of the successor of Peter engaged in the plot, and this little finger is valid for this crusade all Urban IIs and all Saint Bernard of Christendom ”.

“We have no doubts about reaching this supreme end of our efforts, but how? The unknown does not emerge Again. Nevertheless, as nothing should differ us from the tracked plan, on the contrary, everything must tend toward it…, we want to give the Supreme Selling agents some advice … “

These tips are truly Luciferian:

“Crush the enemy whoever he may be; crush the powerful by means of lies and calumnies; but especially crush him in the egg. It is to the youth we must go, it is that which we must seduce; it is that which we must bring under the banner of the secret societies. In order to advance by steps, calculated but sure, in that perilous way, two things are of the first necessity. You ought have the air of being simple as doves, but you must be prudent as the serpent. Your fathers, your children, your wives themselves, ought always be ignorant of the secret which you carry in your bosoms. If it pleases you, in order the better to deceive the inquisitorial eye, to go often to confession, you are, as by right authorised, to preserve the most absolute silence regarding these things. You know that the least revelation, that the slightest indication escaped from you in the tribunal of penance, or elsewhere, can bring on great calamities, and that the sentence of death is already pronounced upon the revealer, whether voluntary or involuntary.

“Now then, in order to secure to us a Pope in the manner required, it is necessary to fashion for that Pope a generation worthy of the reign of which we dream. Leave on one side old age and middle life, go to the youth, and, if possible, even to infancy. Never speak in their presence a word of impiety or impurity, Maxima debetur puero reverentia. Never forget these words of the poet for they will preserve you from licences which it is absolutely essential to guard against for the good of the cause. In order to reap profit at the home of each family, in order to give yourself the right of asylum at the domestic hearth, you ought to present yourself with all the appearance of a man grave and moral. Once your reputation is established in the colleges, in the gymnasiums, in the universities, and in the seminaries-once that you shall have captivated the confidence of professors and students, so act that those who are principally engaged in the ecclesiastical state should love to seek your conversation…..

“That reputation will open the way for our doctrines to pass to the bosoms of the young clergy, and go even to the depths of convents. In a few years the young clergy will have, by the force of events, invaded all the functions. They will govern, administer, and judge. They will form the council of the Sovereign. They will be called upon to choose the Pontiff who will reign; and that Pontiff, like the greater part of his contemporaries, will be necessarily imbued with the Italian and humanitarian principles which we are about to put in circulation. It is a little grain of mustard which we place in the earth, but the sun of justice will develop it even to be a great power; and you will see one day what a rich harvest that little seed will produce …

“Seek out the Pope of whom we give the portrait. You wish to establish the reign of the elect upon the throne of the prostitute of Babylon? Let the clergy march under your banner in the belief always that they march under the banner of the Apostolic Keys. You wish to cause the last vestige of tyranny and of oppression to disappear? Lay your nets like Simon Barjona. Lay them in the depths of sacristies, seminaries, and convents, rather than in the depths of the sea, and if you will precipitate nothing you will give yourself a draught of fishes more miraculous than his. The fisher of fishes will become a fisher of men. You will bring your-selves as friends around the Apostolic Chair. You will have fished up a Revolution in Tiara and Cope, marching with Cross and banner-a Revolution which it will need but to be spurred on a little to put the four quarters of the world on fire.”

The full text, in French, can be found here:


Footnotes: (as found in original)

  1. One may wonder whether the following facts do not fall within the scope of the calculated revelations: the July / September 1969 issue of Charivari: “Sects and Secret Societies in France today”, coinciding with the launch of the film: “The Virgins of Satan” – white magic against black magic – coming after the discovery – unwanted this one – of the dossier of Jamaa, which touches on the question of Luciferian relations with men through incubi and succubi … Etc … As well as certain publications from Lafont (collection with black covers and gold titles), of ” I read it ”, of the “Pocket Book”, and also the publications “Nostradamus” and “Le Grand Albert”, etc …
  2. Obviously, the Occult Power would not have made the mistake of making known such a document, which should remain secret. Faced with this unexpected revelation, he tried everything to make the Catholics themselves deny its authenticity …Our Lord recently confirmed its authenticity in his revelations to the nun of Mexico.
  3. All the following quotes concerning Haute-Vente are taken from his work, L’Eglise Romaine en face de the revolution. See also our brochure, The Judeo-Masonic Plan against the Church, published in 1927.
  4. Original writings of the Order and the Sect of the Illuminated, 1787, Munich by the printer of the Court, quoted by BARRUEL in his Memoirs to serve the history of Jacobinism (New edition in 1974. Diffusion de la Pensée Française Editors). In the citations of the documents that follow, it is we who have put the most important passages in Roman characters.
  5.  You have heard of Our Lord’s “secret speeches”. This is how these people write history!

Traditionis Custodes shows how much Freemasons hate the Mass 

NOTE: this article has been updated. It was formerly titled, “TC shows how much Synarchists hate the Mass”. However, since “Synarchy” is not in common usage, the title has been changed to reflect that fact.

It’s fairly clear by now that most of the actions of Pope Bergoglio reflect the dreams and aspirations of his New World Order handlers, aka the Masons and Synarchists. In case you missed my first article on Synarchy, this title refers to those members of the cult which is behind the One World Government and the Great Reset, aka the globalist technocrats who momentarily have the world in the palm of their grubby little hands.

Thus with his new Motu Proprio, Bergoglio has shown us that this particular expression of the Holy Sacrifice, the so-called “extraordinary form”, presents a huge obstacle to the New World Order. Now this is quite strange when we think about the numbers and the nature of Latin Mass communities: they are not the most numerous of Catholic parishes since the Latin Mass is not the most common form of Catholic worship. Members are often either younger or much older than would make effective anti-globalist activists but somehow Tradition still poses a threat to the globalists and to their ascent to domination. Why is that?

My previous article on Synarchy mentioned five hallmarks and aims of that sect, as given by Bishop Gruber in his book, Athanasius and the Church of our Time. Those five features of Synarchy are key to understanding its influence on the Church over the last one hundred years and they are evident in the Pope’s new plan for ridding the Church of the Traditional Latin Mass. 

This article will look at the Motu Proprio, Traditionis Custodes, in the light of the marks and stated aims of Synarchy and will examine how the suppression of the Mass leads the Church closer to those goals.

The appeal to esotericism

The word “esotericism” derives from the Greek esotéros, meaning “that which is within”, and can have slightly different meanings depending on context, but essentially it indicates the pursuit of “hidden knowledge” or of “the divine” or of the “inner church” that is apparently to be found within each of us. 

Esotericism was historically part of Rosicrucianism, Gnosticism and Masonry and these days is closely aligned with the New Age movement. Its popularity underscores the reality that man is made to worship and if the One True God is not being worshipped as He intends, then will arise perverse forms of worship,  and the substitution of God of revelation for the chimera of the “god” within.

Esoteric religions often include a series of initiation ceremonies and this is usually portrayed as part of the journey toward “illumination”. As the Church tells us, “Salvation, in this context, coincides with a discovery of the Self.” Enneagram, anyone?

The danger of such an approach is immediately obvious: with no objective truth to guide the gullible soul, she becomes open to every kind of spiritual illness and even to direct demonic influence. [It is no coincidence that Synarchists believe they are guided by the wisdom of highly-evolved and enlightened beings. Some Synarchists literally call this collective guide, “Legion.”.] Under the guise of looking for a deeper or “truer” meaning of Christianity, the soul is led invariably to a distortion or denial of the truth.

Since esotericism is the basis of the Synarchists’ spirituality, every attempt is made by them to reject religious expression that promotes: objective truth; a God Who has definitively revealed Himself along with His moral code; personal sin and the need for Redemption. The Traditional Mass, with its continual focus on sacrifice and the need for atonement, expresses all of this in one inviolable package. Pope Pius XII reminds us that through the Mass and the sacraments, Christ is “constantly atoning for the sins of mankind, constantly consecrating it to God.” 

So why should men and women who are capable of finding all they need “within” have any need for a priesthood making ritual atonement for their sins? The Latin Mass is a silver bullet to the Esotericists’ narcissistic spirituality: hence it must be destroyed.

The revolt against the structures of the ChurchSynarchy cannot establish itself without the overturning of all existing structures in society – from governments to the economy down to the family unit. Included in this restructuring is the hierarchy of the Church, and this push to restructure it can be seen in the many calls for the promotion of the laity, particularly women, in the name of “good governance” or even “child protection”. However, that kind of restructuring represents an inversion of the hierarchy given to us by God for the good order of society. 


The Mass, and especially the Latin Mass, embodies the hierarchy planned by God: that of a male leader, the Pope, acting as God’s regent and overseeing a male episcopate, which in turn oversees a male priesthood, which offers sacrifice on behalf of all the people with the assistance of male laymen. Without the example of the hierarchy willed by God as evident in the Latin Mass, men and women are seduced into joining the disordered, humanistic hierarchy being promoted by the New World Order – the “hierarchy of the equal”, where ambitious women jostle for power with men, where the ill-equipped are routinely promoted based solely on quotas and politics rather than on merit, and where children – inexperienced by definition – are encouraged to give advice to adults.

Even the traditional design of a Catholic church’s sanctuary was meant to point to God’s hierarchy, as well as to underscore belief in the Real Presence and the sacrificial nature of the Mass. When the Novus Ordo Missae dispensed with the high altar, replacing it with a Protestant-like table to be presided over by a priest who faced the congregation, the Church’s hierarchical structure was reoriented. An equalisation appeared to have taken place: the priesthood – and therefore Christ Himself – was de-elevated to the same status as the laity. Women began to buzz around the altar, “helping” Father in a shameful parody of a kitchen with too many cooks. In this way, the faithful were given the erroneous idea that the Mass is nothing more than a community meal. The well-documented decline in the Real Presence among Catholics worldwide shows that the adoption of tables in Novus Ordo parishes has assisted with this heresy no end.

In his book, The Catholic Sanctuary, Michael Davies quotes Msgr. Gamber who succinctly drew the connection between belief in the Real Presence and the traditional sanctuary, as used in the traditional Latin Mass:

“A real change in the contemporary perception of the purpose of the Mass and the Eucharist will occur only when the table altars are removed and the Mass is again celebrated at the high Altar; when the purpose of the Mass is seen again as an act of Adoration and glorification of God and of offering thanks for His blessings, for our salvation and for the promise of heavenly life to come, and as the mystical reenactment of the Lord’s sacrifice on the cross.”

Msgr Klaus Gamber

So by contrast, rejecting the use of the High Altar by abolishing the Old Mass, will ensure that the true nature and purpose of the Mass will, for the most part, remain obscured. This suits the Synarchists and Modernists and their focus on works,  their abhorrence of the supernatural, and their hatred of God’s hierarchy.

Ecumenism

One of the greatest areas of concern to Synarchists is the Catholic Church’s claim to being the True Ark, outside of which there is no salvation. 

While ecumania is widespread throughout most parts of the Post-Conciliar Church, eg here, here and here, it is almost non-existent within Traditionalist circles. The idea of a lowest-common-denominator Christianity is simply incompatible with the idea of an exclusive Church with exclusive sacraments available only to properly initiated and disposed members. Similarly, the practice of honouring Protestant or even non-Christian leaders with the same respect as should be shown to Catholic clerics does not occur in traditional parishes. By suppressing or eliminating Latin Mass parishes, Synarchists can further dilute Catholicism through the expansion of ecumenism.  

True Catholics know – and the world also believes – that our worship is central to our Faith. Ask any outsider to describe Catholicism and they are sure to mention the Mass. Show an atheist images of various forms of worship from a multitude of religions and they are sure to identify a Mass as belonging to Catholics – in fact, they just might convert when they witness a Latin Mass.

Progressives may find some utility in grabbing a Catholic or Christian motif, such as a dove or praying hands, to include in their propaganda campaigns, but since the Latin Mass forms a complete and inviolable unit, it must be either desacralised or discarded by them. The Post-Conciliar Modernists have all but succeeded in desacralising the Mass, both through the Novus Ordo itself and especially through its widespread abuses, but they have never been able to destroy the Old Mass. Even if there was no supernatural power behind the Mass, the integrity of the Latin Mass’ ritual would still pose a threat to the Synarchists who have set out to form a One-World religion by dismantling all the others.

The glorification of Christ by a new humanity

It is a common strategy of evil-minded reformers to insinuate themselves into an institution and empty its words and doctrines of meaning, in order to reshape it according to their own ends. This is exactly the tactic that has been employed by the Synarchist proponents of The Great Reset, since the start of the manufactured COVID crisis. They have changed our lexicon to redefine “health” and “safety”, “charity” and the “common good” to push for a reshaping not only of our economic and governmental structures, but also of our social ones. In fact, they have made no attempt at hiding their desire for a global engineered society, presented in the guise of a more human and just world. At the same time, we have seen a rewriting of history that elevates politically correct actors and reduces truly heroic and virtuous figures to dust.

This has a close parallel with movements seen within the Church over the last century, the currents of which made their way into the Second Vatican Council and have since become part of the post-conciliar narrative, as exemplified by Bergoglio’s papacy. This includes the fabrication that the Church ignored the poor until the 1960’s; that She exists only to keep the masses in servitude, that the directives handed on to us by the Magisterium are the product of “clericalism” and not of God. Here again we have seen “charity” redefined to mean silence in the face of immorality, and a secular form of “humanism” has replaced our former struggle toward holiness. 

The journey towards a “new humanism” is in total accord with the precepts of evolution, and was promulgated by the heretics Teilhard de Chardin, Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac and Jacques Maritain.

It is linked to the idea of esotericism, as man is encouraged to look within himself for the source of revelation in order to construct the “new humanity” which will, according to its proponents, (finally) worship God in spirit and in truth. 

Synarchists, (and as Pope Leo XIII reminds us, Naturalists and Freemasons) reject the idea of Original Sin, so their vision of the cosmos, according to intellects deceived by sin, is that man is naturally good and becomes corrupted by earthly influences. They abhor the Latin Mass because as a ritual, it is so obviously theocentric; they prefer something anthropocentric and vaguely “spiritual”, something mystical but aimed at their selfish pursuit of hidden knowledge.

This “New Humanism” with its “New Christ” – the God who lowered HImself to our level in order to help us remain there, has no need for tradition. And as Fr Richard Cipolla wrote, it is the Mass that is at the very heart of our tradition.

” … central to the act of faith is not a written creed. It is the worship of the God who loved us so much that he sent his Son to die for us on the cross for our sins and who rose again on the third day to make life everlasting life possible for us.”

This notion offends the Modernist spirit, with its roots in the Existentialist philosophy of continuous development, novelty and change. As Fr Bourmaud explains, for the Modernist, tradition is not conservatism but is “reference” and “creativity.” Some Modernists go so far as to say that attachment to what they see as the mere “externals” of the traditional Mass is a form of idolatry.

Seen in this light, the Mass of the Ages makes a mockery of the New Humanism since it shows forth the unchanging nature of God and His relationship to us. It is like the Creation story opposed to the fable of evolution, the “ex nihilo” compared to the laborious ascent from slime to humanity. And the Mass is splendour and beauty and truth for all men, regardless of wealth, social standing, even morality – as all may attend the Mass and are encouraged to do so. 

The inversion of all the truths taught by Christ.

The preceding has shown that every major tenet of Synarchy involves a rejection and inversion of some truth handed onto us from Jesus Christ and that the Mass of Pius V instead substantiates those truths.

If Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies, then Synarchy is the synthesis of all heresies AND the synthesis of every effort to deny objective reality. Those Luciferian devotees teach that gender is fluid and may be changed: God through His right worship shows us that men and women are different and immutable, equal in dignity but not in purpose, part of a hierarchical structure that exists for the good of society.

Synarchy teaches that God is found within, whereas the Mass teaches that God’s Truth must come to us from without, by observation and by formal teaching, but also shows us that paradoxically He can exist within us through our consumption of transubstantiated Bread, and can impart to us a supernatural gift each time we receive Holy Communion.

The technocrats try to tell us that only with their help, their ideas and their expertise can the world be transformed into a Utopia where all men are equal and where injustice is stamped out by a rod of iron and a jackboot. The Mass shows us that an earthly Utopia is impossible as all men are sinners and will continue to sin until the end of the world, but more than that: the Mass gives us a foretaste of heaven, our true home and it is this reality that shows most clearly the folly of their schemes and plans – the earthly paradise they offer pales into comparison with everlasting peace and happiness, with the eternal bliss of the next life, with that astounding life of perfect friendship with God and His saints that awaits the faithful in heaven.

They fear the Mass, for the way it catechises the faithful as well as those without faith, for its consonance with the truth, and above all, because of the intrinsic power of the Mass itself. As St Peter Julian Eymard tells us (emphasis added)

“…the altar is now the perpetual triumph and glory of our Saviour’s love. The Mass is the perfect adoration of God by the Sovereign Priest, Jesus Christ; the infinite thanksgiving expressed by the Divine Lamb. All the graces of the Redemption flow from this mystical cross...”

St Peter Julian Eymard, “The Holy Eucharist”

Do we fully understand that? All the graces of the Redemption.

That is why the Masons, Modernists and Synarchists hate the Mass and that is why it had to be stopped. And that is precisely why they will never achieve their goal.

Mary, Destroyer of all Heresies

Posted at Katholisches.info in 2017 and translated by dodgy online software:

(Rome) Last December 11th, Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider, one of the most remarkable and outstanding bishops of the Catholic Church, gave a lecture in Seville, Spain. The theme was: “Maria, vencedora de todas las herejias” (Mary, conqueror of all heresies). 

The Blessed Pope Pius IX had the Mother of God in his bull Singulari Quadam Perfusi of 9 December in 1854 as “Virgo Beatissima, quae interemit ac perdidit universas haeresas” means: “Blessed Mary, destroyer of all heresies.” The day after the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed, Pius IX gathered. , again to its particular task to meet all the cardinals and bishops who came to Rome for the occasion to “strengthen brothers in faith” that, and provided them with Singulari Quadam, an authentic interpretation of the pronounced Marie dogma.

In his lecture, Bishop Schneider spoke primarily about Freemasonry and its work with a view to their anniversary. Several commemorations will take place in 2017. In the German-speaking area, with some media outlay, the view of Martin Luther’s “500 years of Reformation” is narrowed. This obscures other events of historical importance. These include two major events that began 100 years ago. There is the October Bolshevik Revolution in Russia with the spread of communism, which today still controls a fifth of the world’s population. And on the other hand, the apparitions of the Virgin Mary shortly before that in Fatima, Portugal,

However, in 2017 there is still a major event on the agenda. 300 years ago, in 1717, the first grand lodge was founded in London, to which all Freemasonry refers. So 2017 is indeed a “memorable” year.

Bishop Schneider is best known for promoting the regaining of sacredness in the Holy Liturgy and reverence for the Most Holy Eucharist. He published several writings on the subject of communion. In it he advocates the worthy reception of communion and recommends kneeling communion on the mouth, as Pope Benedict XVI. reintroduced in the papal masses. Because of the special attention paid to Holy Communion, Bishop Schneider is one of the staunch defenders of the sacrament of marriage and penance. For the Synod of Bishops on the Family, he published a publication with 100 questions and answers, with which the efforts of a new doctrine were rejected, to admit remarried divorced persons to the sacraments.

In Seville, Bishop Schneider spoke about the secret society of Freemasonry, which in 2017 can look back on 300 years of turbulent and obscure existence and its revolutionary and subversive endeavors. Bishop Schneider called Freemasonry, which has largely shied the light of day since its foundation, as the “instrument of Satan”.

In his remarks, the Auxiliary Bishop of Astana recalled Saint Maximilian Kolbe and his descriptions of the aggressive behavior of the Freemasons in Rome during the First World War. In 1917, in the middle of the war, the Freemasons in Rome celebrated their 200th anniversary. The Freemasons had openly declared war on the Church. They had covered Rome with posters and demonstratively pulled the black flag of Giordano Bruno to the Vatican. On the posters and the flags “a representation of the Archangel Michael was to be seen, who lay defeated on the ground in front of the triumphant Lucifer,” said Bishop Schneider.

Because of these experiences resolved the young Maximilian Kolbe, who was then at the Gregoriana studied theology, the creation of the Militia Immaculatae (Knighthood of the Immaculate) to “confront the actions of Lucifer”.

According to Bishop Schneider, the aim of Freemasonry is “to eliminate all teaching about God, especially Catholic teaching”. To achieve this goal, Freemasonry has made use of “numerous societies” since it was founded. “They want the dissolution of morality” for a very specific reason. They are in fact convinced of the principle that “one cannot defeat catholicity with logical arguments without corrupting morality”. Masonic action based on this principle is currently “very topical” again, according to the auxiliary bishop from Kazakhstan.

“Undoubtedly, however, the Immaculate Virgin Mary will in the end trample the greatest heresy of all time: the heresy of the Antichrist,” said the auxiliary bishop.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider is the son of Black Sea Germans. His family had been deported with more than a million Russian Germans under Stalin to Siberia and Central Asia, which is why Schneider was born in Tokmok, Kyrgyzstan in 1961. In 1973 the family was allowed to move to the Federal Republic of Germany, where he grew up and in 1982 he entered to the Order of Canon Regulars of the Holy Cross. Saint Anthony of Padua belonged to this order before he joined Saint Francis of Assisi. Schneider has been providing pastoral care in Kazakhstan since 2001. In 2006 Pope Benedict XVI appointed him Titular Bishop. As such, he was initially auxiliary bishop of the Karaganda diocese. Since 2011 he has been auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Astana.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: InfoVaticana

Mea Culpa

I must apologise for not spending very much time here lately. My research time has been reduced to NIL as I have had to deal with a pressing project [of the putting-food-on-the-table variety.] I do miss my book and my notes and those late nights spent delving into the world of synarchy.

Hopefully I can be back on track soon and who knows? Maybe the angels will deign to help me publish my book by its original due date: October 13.

God bless.

Francis Imposes the Freemason’s Mass

There was a time when the average Catholic in the pews could be forgiven for not knowing the provenance of the New Mass – that its chief architect was an Ecclesiastical Freemason by the name of Archbishop Annibale Bugnini. For those of us brought up on a diet of quasi-universalism, the “New Springtime” and popular apparitions such as Medjugorje, there was no other Mass than the Novus Ordo and “Tradition” meant nothing more than a dim memory of Grandma having fish on Fridays.

Those days of naivety passed away, however, as knowledge of Bugnini’s secret affiliation and of the extent of the devastation Paul VI’s revolution became mainstream. (Well, almost. There are some who maintain that there is no evidence while also admitting that Bugnini may have been something worse than a Mason – I’ll leave it to the reader to speculate as to what something worse could be. That infamous scene from Windswept House springs to mind.)

The fruits of Vatican II have been revealed in all their awful reality – if not before the “pandemic” then certainly since the Mass was first suppressed more than a year ago due to COVID restrictions.

The Novus Ordo was a failure, Vatican II was a disaster and the logical hermeneutic of continuity exists not in the context of novelty, but of Tradition.

These facts explain the gut-wrenching reaction experienced by so many in response to the pope’s Motu Proprio, Traditionis Custodes. Yes, the same pope who hates formality, scorns “clericalism” and always seeks to “accompany” people “in their concrete circumstances” (at least when it comes to immorality) has used his unique position to abolish the Latin Mass, deliberately ignoring the “concrete circumstances” of the largest remaining cohort of believing, practising Catholics and also greatly insulting the Holy Trinity.

Some have already attempted to play down the consequences of the Motu Proprio – the Rorate Caeli article, while a bold attempt at legalistically applying Traditionis, is in my opinion, only grasping at straws. The Pope knows exactly what he wants to achieve and will take all steps necessary to see that his wishes are carried out. This pontiff who despises legalism and the constraints of dogma will not be so lax when it comes to suppressing the Mass of the ages and the thriving parishes around which they revolve. As Professor Brian McCall says, the law is always to be interpreted “according to the mind of the legislator”. This means our own pious desires don’t have a leg to stand on against a man like Francis.

Francis, while claiming to be imitating the act of his predecessor, Pope Pius V, who abolished any form of the Mass that was less than two hundred years old is performing a diabolical version of that act. If he really was to imitate Pius V by his pronouncement, it is the Novus Ordo that would be abolished as it is less than a hundred years old and was impiously designed, as noted above.

It seems clear that very little wiggle-room is to be given to those diocesan priests who run Latin Mass parishes: unless they have a sympathetic bishop – which are few and far between – they will have to look for new premises in which to offer Mass. Those bi-rite priests, who may be at the first steps on the path of Tradition will need to be very strong in order to resist the approaching “Oath of Allegiance” to Vatican II. I suspect that some will now go “full-trad” when they realise the malice underlying the pope’s plans.

I do also wonder if there is another stage – waiting perhaps for a future, unworthy pope – in which the Novus Ordo will be reformed so as to make it invalid. A little tweaking of the words of consecration, perhaps, to which the newly-conscripted “loyal” priests will be forced to adhere.

In any case, this present insult to God will not remain unpunished: as we saw almost directly after the flagrant violation of the First Commandment during the Amazon Synod, God’s justice can be swift. The global “pandemic” which saw millions of faithful denied access to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the sacraments followed immediately after Francis’ Pachamama worship was nothing other than a consequence of the hierarchy’s idolatry, in accordance with God’s promises made in Scripture (eg 2 Chronicles 21.) With the Great Reset technocrats already predicting a global cyber attack, it is not beyond imagining that this will be the next “plague” to strike the earth.

Many have made the connection between Fatima and Our Lady of Mt Carmel, on whose feast day the pope released his Motu Proprio. There are quite a few connections, in fact: for example, during the Miracle of the Sun, the little seers saw Our lady clothed in the habit of Carmel, reminding us of the importance of wearing the brown Scapular. It is surely no coincidence that the 104th anniversary of that miracle was celebrated only a few days prior to the release of the Motu Proprio.

We must not lose hope, no matter what happens next. The prophet Elias for whom the Carmelites are named, is said to have had a vision of a foot in the raincloud that ended the great drought God had sent on the land. Tradition tells us that this foot belonged to Our Lady – the Woman through Whom God would incarnate His only Son. In our own time, we know that God is preparing for another great intervention: when Our Lady crushes the head of the serpent through her glorious Triumph.

Ecclesiastical Masonry in Liberia

In his book, Vigilant Catholic, David Dionisi details unresolved scandals among the hierarchy in Liberia and claims that top Churchmen are members of a local variant of Freemasonry known as The Poro.

Dionisi worked as a missionary in Liberia for many years and helped to break the news of the sexual abuse of seminarians by an two prelates, Archbishop Lewis Zeigler and Bishop Andrew Karnley. He claims that sex abuse is “a weapon” used by secret societies to pressure good priests into leaving the Church. Homosexuals are routinely ordained and promoted while those men who are faithful to the Magisterium are often passed over, denied medical care or may even become the victims of false accusations.

Local secret societies based in witchcraft, such as Liberia’s Poro, have always existed in Africa, but there is evidence that Freemasons gained control of The Poro more than a hundred years ago. Traditional rituals of passage for boys still continue: these include invocations of demons, sex magic and sodomy. Girls are initiated into a corresponding group known as Sande, and also experience physical and sexual abuse during the rituals. Sometimes the rituals are so harsh that the children do not survive and members are bound under a code of silence similar to Freemasonry’s prohibition on revealing its secrets. Some members began to speak out when accusations of abuse became public, verifying details of the rituals that had up until then been completely shrouded in secrecy.

Shockingly, some Catholic associations have adopted similar initiations and as well as the code of extreme secrecy. The founder of one group has also been accused of covering up the sexual abuse of minors and is a close friend of the sexually-abusive bishops mentioned above. David Dionisi names sixteen Catholic priests and prelates whom he believes to be members of the Poro sect; some of the group are said to belong to more than one secret society.

One of this group, a priest by the name of Fr Gareth Jenkins groomed numerous boys, allowing many to sleep at his home. Those boys who accepted his sexual advances were allowed to later enter the seminary, whereas those who rejected Fr Jenkins were stopped from becoming priests.

The code of silence has led to the widespread failure to act against the predatory bishops and appeals to the Nuncio fell on deaf ears. This is hardly surprising, though, as Dionisi claims a former nuncio, Archbishop George Antonysamy was part of the homosexual network in Liberia. The current nuncio, Bishop Borwah, is named on the list of Poro society members, and told Dionisi that Pope Francis personally put a stop to an investigation of the Liberian Church.

A former priest-turned-whistleblower, Fr Gabriel Sawyer, wrote a seventeen page testimony which has many similarities to Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano’s explosive 2018 expose. Like Archbishop Vigano, Fr Sawyer was forced into hiding after receiving death threats. He claims he married his life-long friend in order to escape from the persecution. This fits a pattern that has occurred in other parts of Africa, eg Cameroon, where a bishop was assassinated for refusing to cave in to a homosexual priest cabal in 2017. The Liberian prelates unsurprisingly denied the allegations and pointed to the priest’s marriage as an indication of his lack of credibility, despite his having corroborating testimony from five other priests and laymen. Fr Sawyer’s case reached the Vatican in June of 2019 but despite two years having passed, there has been no public investigation or statement made on the case.

In a further attempt to launch an investigation into the multiple allegations of abuse, David Dionisi met with Cardinal Sean O’Malley in the United States in 2019. After hearing the testimony of this credible witness and refusing to speak via Skype with a senior Liberian priest, O’Malley dismissed him, saying: “At my level, I do not deal with individual cases, I establish best practices.”

Those words would have been of little comfort to those children who were denied access to medical care or funding for their education when David Dionisi’s outreach was suspended or worse, became victims of sexual abuse.

On a continent where corruption is rampant, it is no surprise that Freemasonry should also be very prominent. Its melding with witchcraft also explains how the syncretism which plagues the Catholic Church in Africa has come to be so entrenched. The case also highlights the fact that Pope Francis routinely rejects his own protocols for clerical sex abuse allegations, as laid out in the Motu Proprio, Vos Estis Lux Mundi.

Catholics should have little hope that Pope Francis is sincere about conquering this scourge which has wounded many thousands of children and adults and has decimated the Church. It is time to acknowledge that there exists in the Church a loyalty that surpasses that of thieves and sodomites: it is the blood-tie of Ecclesiastical Masonry.

Synarchy: missing link to the New World Order’s rise

Dr Rudolf Graber, Bishop of Regensburg from 1962 to 1981, revolutionised my understanding of the New World Order and the Church’s part in its establishment. Like many Catholics who acknowledge the role of Masonry in society’s destabilisation, there seemed to be a disconnect between modern feel-good Freemasonry and the historical, militant secret societies that plotted revolutions and the destruction of the Holy Catholic Church.

It did not sit well with me, as it does not sit well with many others, to dismiss modern Masonry as a harmless pursuit, a mere shadow of its former self, perhaps – or worse, as an organisation that never intended any harm at all.

It was Bishop Graber’s book, Athanasius and the Church of our Time ( a free copy, translated via online software is available here) that provided the clue I had been looking for, the missing link, if you will. His Excellency’s book introduced me to the concept of synarchy, and it is this particular offshoot of Masonry that led the world to its current state: that of a soft totalitarianism governed by unelected technocrats.

To be quite honest, I have only this moment finished reading the good Bishop’s book, although I was introduced to it years ago. While pursuing my research on the Conciliar Church’s Hermeneutic of Rupture, Athanasius and the Church of Our Time was cited in footnote after footnote of insightful, traditionalist books. In his very slim volume, Bishop Graber picks up all the threads and pulls them tightly into an intelligent argument, explaining how synarchy grew out of Masonry and other secret societies but always had the stated goal of “a centralized world state with a centralized government planned as an anti-Church.” This is obviously a little different from Masonry’s stated goal of destroying the Church, but here we can see the genesis of plans for an ape of the Church to be built on the hollowed-out edifice of Catholicism.

According to Bishop Graber, the ex-Canon Roca, an excommunicated priest who lived in the 19th century, and whose Masonic ideas are frequently quoted in exposés of the Church’s infiltration, was a devotee of the “divine synarchy.” Roca foresaw a revolution in the Catholic Church, sparked by an ecumenical council, with a “new” dogma”, “new” ritual, and a “new” priesthood.

This plan was also laid out in a 1907 book by the Abbé Melinge, writing under the pseudonym, Dr Alta. Alta gave five key items on an agenda to remake the Church in a diabolical image:

* the appeal to esotericism

* the revolt against the structures of the Church

* the replacement of the Roman papacy by a “pluri-confessional” pontificate able to adapt to a polyvalent ecumenism such as we are seeing established today in the inter-celebration of priests and Protestant pastors

* the glorification of Christ by a new humanity

* the inversion of all the truths taught by Christ.

from Athanasius and the Church of Our Time

It is quite easy to see, in fact, heartbreakingly so, how far the Masons and synarchists have progressed in their plan to create an anti-Church. Add the current threats to the Traditional Latin Mass to the already-witnessed idolatry and syncretism in the Vatican, “synodality,” inversion of truths such as Communion for adulterers and tolerance of homosexuality, and the “New Humanism” of the post-conciliar horizontal Church and it looks as though there is only a little way to go before the Church is unrecognisable. [Humanly speaking, that is. Of course, Jesus Himself was barely recognisable thanks to the tortures He received during His Passion.]

Of particular interest to me – and therefore, I assume, also to you, my dear readers – Bishop Graber also mentions an Italian novel written in 1905, in which some characters discuss the formation of a Catholic Freemasonry. The book was once on the Index and appears to be available only in the original language. In this book, the chief protagonist gathers together a select group of clergy and laity who want to see change in the Church but without an outright rebellion. The speaker recommends that this be achieved by introducing heretical ideas into the minds of the faithful, who will then pressure the hierarchy to implement the changes that they – the hierarchy – had wanted from the start. He also advised against any formal relations among members of this Catholic Freemasonry, to make it more difficult for them to be traced. Was this novel based in fact? I will leave that to you to decide. But just consider this: the heretical proponent of Catholic Masonry suggested that “ideas are stronger than men” and that it may take them fifty years to see their plans come to fruition. That was written in 1905 and fifty years later, the Council of Rupture was opened by John XXIII.

I plan to write more on the topic of synarchy as it has become obvious that this is integral to my book on Ecclesiastical Freemasonry.

In the meantime, please do avail yourself of a free version of Athanasius and the Church of Our Time.

Athanasius and the Church of Our Time

by Bishop Dr Rudolf Graber. Translated from the German

on the 1600th anniversary of his death

FOREWORD

THE 1600 DAY OF THE DEATH of St. Athanasius should not pass by without at least a mention of him in one of the writings. He is one of the few saints to whom history has given the nickname “the Great”. Instead of many words, we quote here what Johann Adam Möhler in his book “Athanasius the Great and the Church in His Time”, especially in the struggle with Arianism ( Mainz 1844) writes about him in the preface: “As soon as I made my first acquaintance with church history, Athanasius appeared to meof such great importance, its fates so extraordinary, its oppression for the sake of faith, its revival, its renewed fall and renewed rise, the high Christian dignity, the exaltation over every misfortune that shines out to us from its history, took my participation so much to claim that a deep longing arose in me to get to know the great man better and to study him in his own writings. The dark feeling that attracted me to these was not deceived: a rich source of spiritual nourishment flowed to me from them. But the more I compared what I found in Athanasius himself with what I found about him in other books, the more it pained me that this great church father was not so well known and recognized in wide circles for a long time. than he deserves it so much. This made me decide to work on it, to bring to light the treasures of Christian wisdom and knowledge hidden in it and to describe its entire history. “

In line with the title of this work, the title was chosen: “Athanasius and the Church of Our Time” (in the struggle with modernism).

May this humble writing help to fulfill the words which Basil the Great addressed to Athanasius in 371: “In everything the Lord works great through those who are worthy of him. We therefore hope that such a great service will be befitting you, as a result of which the confusion of the people will end, that all will submit to one another in love and that the old strength of the Church will be renewed. “

Regensburg, am Feste des hl. Athanasius -2. May 1973

+ Rudolf Graber Bishop of Regensburg

INTRODUCTION

As if the powers of the deep and the powers in the heights were destroying the church from the face of the earth. But one stood there like a rock, a breakwater, Athanasius; One jumped into the breach everywhere, Athanasius; one swung God’s sword over east and west, Athanasius “(2).

How much this great confessor moved the minds in stormy times is shown – to name just one example – the church political pamphlet of the great Görre “Athanasius” (3), which this after the arrest of the Archbishop of Cologne Klemens August Freiherr von Droste-Vischering, which was “the hour of birth of a Catholic German people” (4), published in 1838. Franz Schnabel says of this writing: “The effect of the pamphlet was overwhelming. Here spoke a brilliant and experienced journalist who knew how to put the words, how to produce the evidence and how to grasp the educated reader, so that from there the effect spread to the people. After just a few weeks, seven thousand copies were out of print “(5). The government issued a ban, but had to refrain from this project. because the resistance that was sparked was too strong. In the preface to the second edition, Görres takes a sharp stand against those who demand a “German Concilium”: “Then the good time will come and the old one will be abolished. Anyone who has had a crazy idea for fifty years, who has not found a buyer, has recently brought it to market here; for now or never “(6). This Concilium would have to be “an ecumenical one.” (7)

As preconditions for the admission of the Protestants, Görres ironically demands “that they have critically destroyed at least one chapter of the Bible; those that naturally explain at least one miracle of the Bible and therefore do it are capable of; those who have succeeded in finding and interpreting a new Jewish or Christian myth; all who have any foundation of the doctrine, then the holy synod would not fail to proceed immediately to order and establish the doctrine. A new creed would have to be designed as the foundation and foundation of the whole, of the kind that all reasonable people are allowed to profess it. In view of the advances that science has made in recent times, it cannot be difficult to bring about such a work, all the more so since some good preparatory work is already available from some quarters “(9). Görres himself then tries this Formulation of such a new creed, targeting contemporary Hegelian philosophy and making it ridiculous. 

It goes beyond the scope of our introduction to go into the content of “Athanasius” in detail. Nevertheless, we cannot fail to quote a few things and leave it to the reader to discover something related to our time. Görres’ description of the lying zeitgeist is captivating : “It has come to the point where we find ourselves surrounded and surrounded by lies, as if by an atmosphere; it is breathed in and breathed out … So it happened that we are in the most important things in a fictional world walking around; in an artificial fabulous realm that we ourselves have fantasized about according to our narrow-minded views, our preconceived opinions, our shallow thoughts and poor passions; so far removed from the reality of things,that they do not even recognize each other in the bad aftermath “(10).

Görres, however, does not deal with the Cologne event alone, but goes far back in the prehistory. The removal of the old head of the empire, the emperor, should have been followed by that of the pope. But because this did not succeed, “at least for the time being … the members should separate themselves from him … As it was now court lawyers and territorial diplomats who threaded and carried out the first work, so it was court canonists and metropolitan theologians who did the other Businesses underwent themselves and Catholic priests came and sat in council everywhere during the drafting, and diligently lent a hand in the execution “(11).

So much for the “Athanasius” of the great Görres, whose 125th anniversary of death we are celebrating this year. In our century we meet the Alexandrian again in the novel by the Silesian Cosmus Flam (actually Dr. Josef Pietsch) who was wounded and lost during the siege of Breslau. , who published the work in 1930: “Athanasius comes to the big city or the animal pit” (12). In this utopian novel, which today has to be given the predicate prophetic (13), the poet describes the metropolis of part of Europe, “in which God, spirit, soul and nature have been radically switched off, where love of sex is degraded and the dictatorship of technology prevails “(14). In this city there is a small group of people who have heard of Christ and who call themselves Christian. Athanasius addressed the following words to these compromise Christians, among other things: “You want to be children of light, but you do not want to give up being children of the world. You should believe in repentance, but you believe in the happiness of the new age. You should speak of grace, but you prefer to speak of human progress. You should proclaim God, but you prefer to preach to man and mankind. You call yourselves after Christ, but you should rather name yourselves after Pilate … You are the great ruin. Because you etch in the middle. In the middle you want to sit hissing light and world. You are masters of compromise and go with the world. I tell you: rather go out into the world and leave the Master, whose kingdom is not of this world “(15). Aren’t these really prophetic words? From all that we have quoted from the works mentioned, our intention is clear. The intellectually powerful, intrepid Athanasius should also raise his voice today against what is going on in the church.

Shortly after the fateful June 30, 1934, when Hitler’s henchmen put down the alleged Röhmputsch and liquidated a number of people unpopular to the regime, such as Klausener, Gerlich, and Probst, a small but rousing booklet appeared in the Liga-Verlag in Lucerne: “ St. Ambrose and the German Bishops “. With imploring words the bishops were called upon to imitate the example of the Milanese bishop who, in 390, confronted the Emperor Theodosius and demanded repentance from him for lynching 2,000 people in the Thessalonica circus So – and this was the exhortation of that scripture – the bishops should solemnly protest against what happened on June 30, 1934. This example also shows

Before we turn to a pastoral letter of Athanasius, the situation of the church at the time of Athanasius must be touched upon in a few lines.

But let us leave St. Basilius speak, who writes in a letter from the year 371: “The heresy, which had long since been scattered by the enemy of truth, by Arius, shot up to insolent heights, and like a bitter root it sprouts perishable fruit and is already overpowering because the standard bearer the true doctrine in the individual parishes were driven out of the churches as a result of slander and offense and the authority in their administration was given to those who take captive the hearts of the simple “(16).

In a letter to Athanasius from the year 371/72 there are the telling words: “The whole Church is in dissolution” (17). Looking up at this column on the Nile gives the Bishop of Caesarea courage “from the depths of despair to hope better days “(18). Another letter, written in 372, is addressed to the bishops of Italy and Gaul to come to the rescue “before the churches are completely shipwrecked” (19), because “not only one church is endangered, not even two or three are difficult Storm affected. The evil of heresy rages almost from the borders of Illyria to Thebais. The notorious Arius first sowed the perishable seeds “(20). In the same year he speaks to thePriests of Tarsus that “the present time has a strong tendency to overthrow the Church”. (21) Exactly 1,600 years ago, in the year of the death of Athanasius, he raised the question in a letter to the Alexandrians: “Did he Lord has left his church completely? Is the last hour here, and with this the apostasy begins, so that now the man of sin, the son of perdition, the adversary, who rises above all that is called God and sanctuary, may be revealed “(22). These short quotations, which can of course be multiplied, give an idea of ​​what the church was like back then. What the Cappadocians now describe more generally, Athanasius enumerated in detail in a pastoral letter, who is unique about the grandiose force of the style and the unspeakable pain of his writer and who should provide the framework for our treatise. Here too, of course, the historical background must be briefly outlined. Once again an Arian synod, that of Antioch in 339, had deposed the “immortal” (Athanasius) bishop of Alexandria and sent Gregory the Cappadocian in his place.

“The news of the renewed deposition of Athanasius gave the signal for a storm in Alexandria. The imperial prefect Philagrius intervened with a hard hand. On the night of March 18, 340, Athanasius was expelled from the episcopal palace. The people surrounded the churches with threatening gestures. Athanasius wanted to prevent the worst, he quickly baptized the catechumens, then he fled, and Gregory rode into the city under the protection of a warband. The Jews, Gentiles, and Arians cheered the hireling. A dull murmur and a cry of desperation went through the congregation of believers when Gregory took possession of their churches amid appalling horrors. It was Good Friday. The expelled father heard in his hiding place by the city, how the death scream of those killed by Gregor drowned out the Easter alleluia. Messengers came and told him in breathless horror that hundreds had been dragged out of the churches into the dungeons, holy virgins had been stripped in the squares in front of the sanctuaries and beaten with clubs until they collapsed, and he saw the fire in the sky burned up Christian houses of worship. He can no longer hold out, he writes a letter to all of his bishops, lines full of tremendous pain and yet also a powerful urge to fight. Once a Levite’s wife was desecrated and murdered. Then the Levite in his pain dismembered the corpse and sent the pieces to all the tribes of Israel, so that all of them might see the crime as having happened to themselves and rise like one man for vengeance, and all the tribes should be set in motion, and holy war should be broken out. So did Athanasius begin. And he goes on: “The misfortune of the Levite is nothing compared to what has now been dared against the Church”, and he invokes her in love for the Savior: “Do not overlook such iniquities, do not allow the famous The church of the Alexandrines will be trampled underfoot by the heretics – so that the faith of the church and the laws will not perish in a short time “(23).

This introduction, which is based on a gruesome event from the Book of Judges (24), is taken literally and, in the spirit of Athanasius, we try to describe what has broken through the twelve tribes of the new Israel so that they can muster up to fight resolutely against the threatening “dissolution of the Church” of which Basil spoke or against “self-destruction”, as Pope Paul VI. called it (25).

CIRCULAR LETTER FROM ST ATHANASIUS TO ALL BISHOPS, DATED 340

Athanasius sends greetings (joy) in the Lord to the fellow-bishops as a whole, the beloved gentlemen.

What we have suffered is terrible and almost unbearable; it is not possible to report on it accordingly. In order to make the horror of the events known more quickly, I thought it would be good to recall an account of the Holy Scriptures. A Levite who had been deeply disgraced on his wife – she was a Hebrew woman from the tribe of Judah – must see the excess of the crime. Shaken by the crime that had been dared against him, he divided – as the Holy Scriptures in the Book of Judges tells (chapter 19) – the body of the slain woman and sent parts to the tribes of Israel. Not he alone, but everyone should endure such a serious crime. If they suffered from it with him, everyone should avenge it too. But if they didn’t want to see any of it, so they should all be disgraced as if they themselves were the evildoers. The messengers now reported the incident. But those who heard and saw it declared: This had never happened since the days when the sons of Israel came up out of Egypt. All the tribes of Israel became agitated, and as if they had suffered it themselves, they all rallied against the wrongdoers. The criminals were defeated in war and they were all disgusting. Because the assembled multitudes did not pay attention to the tribal affiliation, but only looked with contempt at the crime. All the tribes of Israel became agitated, and as if they had suffered it themselves, they all rallied against the wrongdoers. The criminals were defeated in war and they were all disgusting. Because the assembled multitudes did not pay attention to the tribal affiliation, but only looked with contempt at the crime. All the tribes of Israel became agitated, and as if they had suffered it themselves, they all rallied against the wrongdoers. The criminals were defeated in war and were horrific to all. Because the assembled multitudes did not pay attention to the tribal affiliation, but only looked with contempt at the crime.

You, brothers, know the story and what the Scriptures clearly show with it. I do not want to elaborate on that, since I am writing to the know, and I now urge you to draw your attention to what has happened now, much worse than then. But that’s why I thought of this story so that you can compare the current events with those of that time and recognize how the present exceeds the cruelty of the past. But you may be more violent against the wrongdoers than it was then. Because the harshness of the persecution against us exceeds that too. The unhappiness of the Levite is small compared to what is assumed today in relation to the church. You haven’t heard anything worse than that in the whole world, no one has experienced greater suffering. Back then it was a single woman of the injustice, a single Levite who suffered violence. Today, however, the whole Church endures injustice, the priesthood has been reviled in high spirits, and – what is worse – the fear of God persecuted by ungodliness. At that time every tribe was terrified at the sight of part of a single woman. Today you can see the whole church cut into pieces. One sees the messengers who are sent to you and to others and report the arrogance and injustice they have suffered. Let yourselves be shaken, I swear you, not as if only we, but as if you too had been wronged. Everyone should help as if he were suffering from it himself. Otherwise the church order and faith of the church may shortly perish. Both are threatened if God does not quickly put the offenses back in order through you,

It is not only now that the church has received order and statutes. They were handed over safely and safely by the fathers. Faith did not just begin now either; it came upon us from the Lord through the disciples. Let it not be that what has been preserved in the churches from the beginning up to our time be given up in our day; may not what has been entrusted to us be embezzled by us. Brethren, as stewards of the mysteries of God, let yourselves be moved as you see how all that is stolen from others. You will hear more of the mail carriers; It urges me to show this briefly, so that you can really see that this has never happened against the churches since the day when the Lord exalted to heaven gave the disciples his commission with the words: “Go out;

CAUSES OF THE INTERNAL CRISIS

WHAT HAPPENED THEN, more than 1,600 years ago, is repeated today, only with a twofold or threefold difference: Alexandria is today the whole world church, which is shaken in its existence, and what happened then in terms of physical violence and cruelty is shifting to another level . Exile is replaced by silence and killing by character assassination. Our Holy Father characterized the intruder Gregory from that time on the bishopric of Alexandria as “Satan who penetrated through a crack into the temple of God”. (27) If we hold him responsible for the confusion in the church, that means no excuse for those people who give in to his tools or even believe that they can deny his existence, but only the biblical truth should be clearly and unambiguously expressed that there is a devil who is the father of lies (Jo 8:44) and the murderer from the beginning (ibid.) and who could claim to be of himself at the temptation of Jesus that power and glory be given to him over all the kingdoms of the world and that he give them to whomever he will (Lk 4, 5f). Even at that time it was recognized from whom the heresy originated, andBasil wrote in 373: “When the devil saw that the church was growing and flourishing during the persecution of the Gentiles, he changed his plan and no longer led the fight openly, but secretly prepared us to stalk and hide his cunning under the name they bear, so that we suffer what one day our fathers seem to suffer, but not for Christ’s sake, since the persecutors also bear the Christian name “(28). Does this word not exactly apply to our situation “The bloody persecutions seem to be over, things are being made more elegant and refined and devilish today. There actually is a Luciferian plan (29), which Pope Leo XIII implies when he says:”In such mad and sinister endeavors, it seems to a certain extent to reveal Satan’s ineradicable hatred and thirst for revenge against Jesus Christ” (30).

We have to pursue this plan, and with it we touch the question of the causes of today’s internal church crisis.

In his circular on modernism, Pope Pius X called it “the reservoir of all heresies” (“omnium haereseon conlectum”) (31). And indeed, when we look back on the Church of antiquity, we see those heresies of that time emerging in a new guise. Arius, who denied the equality of the Logos with the Father, is alive. He lives wherever people avoid the unequivocal confession that Christ is true God, and resort to the most varied of humanly beautiful names. But the core dogma of our belief is practically denied. Pelagius, who denied original sin and so exaggerated the power of human will that grace hardly plays a role anymore, is alive. It is strange how these false doctrines become virulent again. And the reason? It is the flight from the mystery into the self-power of man with his ratio, for which the Arian solution of the mystery of Christ is plausible because it is understandable; it is the proud insistence on the willpower of a person who can do everything he wants and does not have to let himself be fooled by gracious, supernatural currents of power. All of this is mixed up with a kind of gnosis that sought to integrate young Christianity into the world in one of its directions (32), that is, wanted to accomplish an aggiornamento even then. But let’s leave that. We are skipping a whole millennium and are now in the process of illuminating the Luciferian plan during the greatest intellectual upheaval in history, humanism and the Renaissance. This is where the secular process begins, which since then has determined the direction of history and the attitude to life. Here the “Copernican turn” takes place in the opposite sense. While man and history were previously oriented towards God, man is now the focus, thethen four centuries later the matter steps aside or even surpasses it. From now on man is the measure of all things. Do we have to cite evidence from the present here? The “God-is-dead-theology” is – no matter how you interpret it – but only the latest craze. And this trend does not stop at the most sacred. God is on his side and even dominates in the prayers the human being.

ENLIGHTENMENT

THE ENLIGHTENMENT is a further step towards the realization of the Luciferian plan. In the ceremony for Hans Lilje on his 65th birthday (on August 20, 1964) “Farewell to Christianity, 17 responses from publicists and theologians to a contemporary challenge”, there is a contribution by Hans Jürgen Baden entitled “The Second Enlightenment” ( 33). The evangelical author is of the opinion, like some of our contemporaries, that today we have entered a new period of enlightenment or that the typical symptoms of the enlightenment have returned around 250 years ago (34). That is also well known. But it is worth reading up in “Athanasius” des Görres how he describes the clergy in the last phase of the Enlightenment shortly before the French Revolution, and we ask ourselves

‘For it can neither be denied nor concealed that many members of this clergy were already in the penultimate times, before the upheavals of the last occurred, both en masse in many of its noblest institutions, and personally in many of its members, in ever increasing proportions surrendered to increasing slackness; which in the end already led to the fact that, as they went carelessly in and out of the cathedrals, the enthusiasm of the fathers built their faith, and in the pictures with which their artful hand adorned the interior of them, saw nothing more than old junk : so also had scarcely any idea of ​​the rich treasure, whose keeper and narrator, had become their profession. Next to the departing generation, which still tried to preserve the remains of old living tradition in the earlier seriousness and with the old severity, a new one arose, which, keeping it low, talked itself out of the seriousness turned to it as dark monkery, the severity as a useless self-plague, and both as from now on no longer up-to-date explanatory, looked for various agreements over time. Protestantism stood before one’s eyes as a shining example, which one only had to approach in order to rejuvenate the outdated in rapid transformation. It was decided to work, which, however, should initially be carried out in breeding and honoring, without prejudice to the essentials. 

The first approach was dogmatics. It dealt with much, the understanding of which was gradually lost in the increasing flatness of the times; it has now been declared absolutely incomprehensible and relegated as such from the realm of the only thing worth knowing. The mystery, which in its quiet glow requires a spiritual visionary gaze for its appreciation and knowledge, and in its depth a spiritual depth to absorb it thoroughly enough, found this look stupid, but the depth was filled with the wisdom of the world: its spiritual light turned pale hence in the brilliance of the physical; and since it was completely beyond the comprehension of the time, it was hardly tolerated and retained in its outward signs. 

The old doctrine had poured out its inner fullness into a multitude of such externalities, which, as it were, formed their preliminary works against the world: now, however, since the extremities also cooled down with the inner life in the core, these too were given up, and as superfluous where it was practical was eliminated. Thus, after the high castle in the middle had been cleared and the outer works had been abandoned, the teaching was limited to daily necessities and the region of commercial life, and in this simplifying limitation it was thoroughly secular. Breeding proceeded along the same lines. Here, too, the sense of the importance of asceticism was utterly deprived, and the conviction of its inevitable necessity for the clergyman had been utterly lost. The old discipline must therefore appear as an unforgivable harshness against nature, which therefore, like everything exaggerated, instead of reaching the goal, rather led away from it through the revolt of the mistreated. 

So everywhere people found themselves inclined to work towards the liberation of the oppressed; the sharply drawn bonds of discipline were therefore everywhere loosened and partly loosened; while at the same time the old wrinkled toga had to give way to the more comfortable chlamys even in the external service. All of this soon spread from the practice of the individual to that of the institutions; the rule of the order and the custom throughout all the branches of the class were softened everywhere, the lax observance was introduced everywhere in place of the strict ones, and the offspring were soon educated in it in the seminaries “(35).

SECRET SOCIETIES

During the Enlightenment, a number of anti-church associations emerged, of which only two should be mentioned, Freemasonry, founded in London in 1717, and the Order of Illuminati, founded on May 1, 1776 by the canon law professor Adam Weishaupt in Ingolstadt (36). With this we touch the problem of secret societies and their influence on society and the church. Again and again you can read that the French Revolution is due to Freemasonry. A new work, however, establishes the formula: “Freemasonry does not make the revolutions; it prepares it and it continues it “(37).

Be that as it may, in this and similar secret societies the seeds were laid for what was later called synarchy, ie a unified wide state with a unified government that is planned as an opposing church. But of that later. In any case, the French Revolution is an important link in the Luciferian plan. It is not too much to say that some Catholic areas are only now making their main ideas their own, freedom in rebellion against the ruling structures in the church, equality in democratization with the council system and fraternity in the horizontal humanity, where the vertical, God and transcendence in general, is excluded. How closely the 2nd Vatican Council is connected with the French Revolution is shown by statements made at the 11th Congress of the Communist Party of Italy in 1964, which we will come to later.

With this, however, we are already close to the immediate causes of the internal church crisis in the second half of the 20th century. It should be noted here that “the great revolutions – and we are involved in one – do not take place spontaneously; they have their forerunners, often only in secret, their prophets sow the seeds of the revolt around them, and ultimately the leaders and those who carry them out. They are preceded by a subterranean phase, followed by incubation (38) until the eruption occurs. With that we have already dealt with an objection that could be raised to us when we turn to certain secret societies and their spokesmen in the 19th century. It is true that many of these names are not even to be found in the dictionaries (39), but that does not change the fact

Pierre Virion deserves credit above all for drawing attention to these secret societies in his writings. If one reads only a fraction of what Virion has compiled from all the writings of the secret spokesmen, which have now largely disappeared, one is surprised, amazed and horrified that towards the end of the last century all the ideas emerged here that are now in the post-conciliar Time to put the church to the acid test. It should be noted, however, that all these destructive thoughts are secretly aimed at a unified goal, namely to create the opposing church or the “new” church by undermining and repurposing the old church, not so much through an attack from outside, but rather as they say today in the political arena, by the “march through the institutions”. We have already mentioned the French term for all these endeavors, namely synarchy.

It is the sum of secret powers of all the “orders” and schools that have come together, an invisible one To form world government. From a political point of view, the synarchy strives to integrate all social and financial powers that this world government under socialist leadership naturally has to support and promote. Catholicism, like all religions, would consequently be absorbed by a universal syncretism. It would by no means be suppressed, but integrated, whereby the principle of collegiality is already clearly aiming at this. Here you can see what subterranean consequences the coining of such new words has. Ultimately, the synarchy, fully realized, would mean the opposing church (40). Again we have to face the objection that such relationships are based purely externally on word equality and are factually far fetched. But let’s hear what Alphons Rosenberg says about it: “… All these (and other) groups exert influence on the course of church reform, albeit mostly in an invisible way. Most of their ideas, without being specifically named, are absorbed into the spiritual bloodstream of the Church by theologians and shepherds (!) Through evolution and careful screening … “(41). These words should be one of the strongest and clearest evidence for the infiltration methods targeted by the enemy side are assessed and the necessary consequences are drawn from them.

The synarchy plan was drawn up in the years 1880-1890. Without referring to the various groupings, such as To go into more detail, for example, on the cabalistic orders of the Rosicrucians, the Martinists and the Symbolists (42), it should only be mentioned that the Jesuit Riquet and d’Alec Mellor (43), who advocate a rapprochement between the Church and the Freemasons, narrow Maintain relationships with these groups (44). By the way, the founder of the first group, ex-priest Stanislas de Guaita (1861-1897) wrote a hymn of Satan (45).

The ex-canon Roca (1830-1893) deserves a special mention. He was born in Perpignan, France, where he attended the Carmelite School, was ordained a priest in 1858 and an honorary canon in 1869. He made trips to Spain, the United States of America, Switzerland and Italy. Well versed in the occult sciences, he developed extensive propaganda, especially among the youth. This brought him into conflict with Rome. Despite his excommunication, he continued his work, preaching the revolution, proclaiming the coming of the “divine synarchy” under a Pope converted to scientific Christianity. He speaks of a new enlightened Church, influenced by the socialism of Jesus and the apostles. According to Virion, Roca is “an apostate of the strongest kind”, and what he demands and predicts would be taken almost as prophetic (46).

In order to understand his language to some extent, you have to know that he has retained the most common Catholic terms, but has given them a different meaning (as it is today, by the way). He explains frankly: “My Christ is not that of the Vatican.” Or when he speaks of God, he means the person who is taking God’s place. For him the word reform means revolution: “Not reform, but. .. I dare not say it right, because the word is so disreputable … a revolution. ” “The new social order will (therefore) be laid outside Rome, in spite of and against Rome.” But now follows a statement that, as someone has said, shakes us to our core: “The new Church,

In the following we quote various sentences from the works of Roca which illuminate our present crisis. With regard to the future liturgy, he believes “that the divine cult, as regulated by the liturgy, the ceremonial, the ritual and the prescriptions of the Roman Church, will soon undergo a transformation at an ecumenical council (!) That will give it its venerable simplicity of the golden apostolic age will be given back in accordance with conscience and modern civilization “(47). Roca continues:” A sacrifice is being made which is a solemn atonement … The papacy will fall; it will die under the sacred knife that the fathers of the last council will forge. The papal Caesar is a host crowned for the sacrifice “(48).

It strikes us that there was already talk of a council at that time. The Rosicrucian Dr. Rudolf Steiner, the founder of the Anthroposophical Society, declared in 1910: “We need a council and a Pope who will proclaim it.” Wasn’t that what nourished the enthusiasm with which the world greeted the council? the dominant term is the word “new”. Roca proclaims a “new religion”, a “new dogma”, a “new ritual”, “a new priesthood “. He describes the new priests as “progressives”, he speaks of the “suppression” of the cassock and the marriage of the priests (49) and advances to the admission: “The religious, political and social redeemer is made by impersonal onesInstitutions (“institutions impersonelles”) rule over humanity. ” Following this word, one has rightly pointed out how this is shown everywhere today in the collegiality, in the vast amount of “conferences, commissions, committees and meetings” (50). One is almost tempted to say that the person has been pushed back Here the Luciferic plan comes to light: Nothing more about the person who receives their highest consecration through the Trinity and the God-Man, and who is now extinguished by the collective, no matter in what form.

An interim remark is necessary here. It would be a mistake to think that these are only the thoughts of a loner like Roca; no, all this is expressed by a whole series of kindred spirits in a multitude of writings which at least at that time were accessible to the whole world. And hence the question: Why did the Church not take notice of these things? Certainly Pius X did it. But that was all. In the book of Abbe Melinge (better known under his pseudonym Dr. Alta) “L’evangile de l’Esprit-Saint, Jean traduit et commente” (1907), the whole program is developed according to which “work” is done today:

“1. The appeal to esotericism;

2. the revolt against the structures of the Church;

3. The replacement (substitution) of the Roman papacy by a “pluri-denominational” pontificate, which is able to adapt to an all-round (polyvalent) ecumenism that we see established today in the intercelebration of priests and Protestant pastors.

4. the glorification of Christ by a new humanity;

5. the inversion of all truths taught by Christ “(51).

You can’t speak more clearly. Dr. Alta as a priest in the church and it was said of him: “Instead of fleeing from the church like Luther, he stayed to reform in the bosom of the church (temple) (52). Everything has already been there.

But back to Roca. From all the quotes that could be expanded into books, you can already see the tactics: to strip the church of its supernatural character, to amalgamate it with the world, to make the denominational coexistence into an ecumenical one and thus the world unity – Prepare religion in the unified world state. The predicate of the church “self-saving” has disappeared from the vocabulary of dialogue, as one Gnostic lecturer put it: “We are offering the church one more chance, it ranks among the other religions.” 

This of course includes the “Depretrise” (53) of the church, the de-priestification in favor of a lay church, and as a transitional form – again after Roca – the coexistence of celibate and married priests. Now the de-priestization of the church has already begun to an alarming extent. Needless to say, all the priests who walked in the tracks of Rocas (and Loisy’s) are mentioned. Virion asks the question: “How many priests may it have been who ostentatiously remained in the church, but only because they were able to secretly sow the virus of revolution there?” Roca, who tends to exaggerate, replies “a thousand”. 

But Saint-Yves said more moderately: “I know many, and even holy priests, who (out of ignorance) walked on the path to syncretistic Christianity” (54). “How many priests may it have been who ostentatiously stayed in the church, but only because they could secretly sow the virus of revolution there?” Roca, who tends to exaggerate, replies “a thousand”. But Saint-Yves said more moderately: “I know many, and even holy priests, who (out of ignorance) walked on the path to syncretistic Christianity” (54). “How many priests may it have been who ostentatiously stayed in the church, but only because they could secretly sow the virus of revolution there?” Roca, who tends to exaggerate, replies “a thousand”. But Saint-Yves said more moderately: “I know many, and even holy priests, who (out of ignorance) walked on the path to syncretistic Christianity” (54).

Another modern idea that was ubiquitous in these occult circles at the time was a kind of mysticism of democracy. A social Christ was already being preached at that time, and Roca writes: “I believe that this social redemption of the people in the new society. by the accession of democracy to the throne. “And even more sharply on July 26, 1891:” The u, pure Christianity is socialism (Le christianisme pur, c’est le socialisme) “. Therefore, the “convert of the Vatican” expected the canonical Urbi et Orbi declaration that contemporary civilization is the legitimate daughter of the holy gospel of social redemption ” (55).

The whole thing is rounded off by the significant work of the Freemason Yves Marsaudon “L’oecuménisme vu par un Franc-Maçon de Tradition” (56), which he has given an exuberant dedication to Pope John XXIII and that bridges the gap mentioned above What is particularly noteworthy here is the shift in the strategy that can be set around 1908 (57): “The goal is no longer the destruction of the church, but one seeks to use it by penetrates into them. ” With Pope John XXIII. if one believes to have made a start: “With all our hearts we wish the successful outcome of the revolution of John XXIII.” (. ~> 8). “One day the dogmatic church must disappear or assimilate and, in order to assimilate, return to the sources “(59). This is already evident today with the priests:” Today the priest is no longer this special being … on the contrary, he strives (progressively) to mix with modern society “( 60). In this amalgamation process, Freemasonry plays the greatest role: “We Freemasons of tradition allow ourselves to clarify and accentuate the word of a famous statesman (transposer) by adapting it to the circumstances: Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Muslims, Hinduists, Buddhists, Freethinkers and devout thinkers are only first names for us. Our family name is Freemasonry “(61). Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Muslims, Hinduists, Buddhists, free thinkers and devout thinkers are just first names for us. Our family name is Freemasonry “(61). Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Muslims, Hinduists, Buddhists, free thinkers and devout thinkers are just first names for us. Our family name is Freemasonry “(61).

At this point it becomes clear how close the real and the fake are to one another. What is more worth striving for than ecumenism in the observance of the word of Christ “so that they may all be one (Jn 17:21). But the boundary to syncretistic ecumenism, which relativizes the truth and ultimately steers it towards the super “church”, the great goal of the secret societies, is only very thin.

We are, however, far ahead. We have to take a closer look at another phenomenon of our day, sexual debauchery and disruption. In a secret instruction from 1819, which breathes a truly Luciferian spirit, there is the instruction: “Flatter all passions, the worst as well as the most generous …” (62). We read the words in a letter of August 9, 1839 : “We must not individualize the vice; in order for it to increase to the proportions of patriotism and hatred of the Church, we must generalize it. Catholicism is no more afraid of a sharp dagger than the monarchy, but these two foundations of the social order can collapse under corruption; in any case we never allow ourselves to be corrupted (corrompre). So let’s not make martyrs,the vice in the masses. Whatever you strive for with the five senses, that should find its satisfaction … Create hearts full of vices and you will no longer have Catholics. This is the corruption, by and large, that we have undertaken, the corruption of the people by the clergy, that of the clergy by us, the corruption that leads us to dig the grave of the Church “(63).

During this period a thought was expressed that is only now being fully realized. In order to achieve all of these goals that have been mentioned, “a new generation must be created worthy of the kingdom we dream of. Leave aside the old age and the mature age; goes to the youth and if possible to the children. Once your reputation has established itself in the colleges, grammar schools, universities and seminaries, once you have won the trust of professors and students, then make sure that those who are primarily involved in clerical service are happy come to your meetings. This good reputation will give you access to the doctrines in the bosom of the young clergy as well as in the interior of the monasteries.

PIUS X AND MODERNISM

LOOKING BACK AT this 19th century, it must be stated that the Church as a whole paid little attention to these events. The world was too preoccupied with the achievements of science and technology. Even today, after two world wars, one still dreams of eternal evolution and an earthly paradise. What about the church? It was the house that was well founded with strong weir towers. In the 1st Vatican Council, the rock of Peter was so cemented and shielded on all sides that no storm could shake it – so it was said. Only one person saw more deeply, it was Pope Pius X, whom we now have to deal with in more detail in his struggle against modernism, if only because Pope Paul VI. in his inaugural encyclical “Ecclesiam suam” (65) says,Freiherr von Hertling in the “Hochland” (67) headed “Roman Reform Thoughts”, where he explains in the introduction: “Among the papers of Bishop Ketteler von Mainz that were left behind was, as his biographer, P. Pfülf SJ, reports, a hastily sketched one Draft reform plan. Ketteler wanted to submit it to the German bishops and then, with their help, encourage it to be carried out in Rome. “The reform should extend to the whole hierarchy, from the election of the Pope and Roman customs down to the country deans and pastors” (68). In the further course of the article the author shows how the justified criticism and reform must be constituted and what they have to take into account: “Nagging criticism, shaking of trust in the good will of the leading personalities, Disparaging judgment of existing institutions, overzealous exposure of real or supposed damage are therefore far more dangerous in the ecclesiastical field than in the state. Not, of course, for the discerning person. He knows how to distinguish between ideal and reality, between what should be by law and what people’s weaknesses make of it again and again. He does not despair of the truth of the Christian doctrine of salvation, because he has to learn that it is occasionally distorted by superstitious exercises, dishonored by unworthy priests, and abused in disdainful profit-making sense. He knows how strong ties we all hold on to what has passed down from our ancestors, knows how difficult it is to get rid of what has become historical, after custom and habit seem to have given him a right of existence which fundamental judgment must deny him. But not everyone has this insight. In large circles it is completely absent. Then there is the fact that the life of the modern world often moves in paths that are alien to the supernatural Christian faith, if not directly hostile. That is why the half-wits, the wavering, the little believers tend to be affected without resistance by a sharp accusation against church personalities or a ruthless criticism within the church of existing and tolerated institutions here or there. The last loose connection that still bound her inwardly to the Church is broken. With regard to the whole of Catholic piety, they think they should break the rod when they experience that some absurd invention of pious fools is exposed to the curse of ridicule. Why am I saying all this? Because I would like to establish the idea that as a critic or reformer of his church should only appear before the public who has the will and the power to really improve what he sees as in need of improvement, or at least is able to do his exhibitions and to make his suggestions heard at the relevant authority. Otherwise, with the best of disposition, he will only offend the weak and bring joy to the enemy ”(69). that a critic or reformer of his church should only appear before the public if he has the will and the power to actually improve what he sees as in need of improvement, or at least is in a position to listen to his exhibitions and his suggestions at a decisive point To provide. Otherwise, with the best of disposition, he will only offend the weak and bring joy to the enemy ”(69). that a critic or reformer of his church should only appear before the public if he has the will and the power to actually improve what he sees as in need of improvement, or at least is in a position to listen to his exhibitions and his suggestions at a decisive point To provide. Otherwise, with the best disposition, he will only offend the weak and bring joy to the enemy ”(69).

But unfortunately little or no attention was paid to these warning words. In the indexed novel “IISanto” by Antonio Fogazzaro (1842-1911) we find the following passages which look back on what we said about the secret societies: “We are,” says Don Paolo, “a number of Catholics in Italy and outside Italy, clergy and laity seeking church reform. We want to see this reform brought about without indignation, through the lawful authority. We want reforms of religious instruction, reforms of cult, reform of the discipline of the clergy, and even reforms of the highest regiment. 

Therefore we have to create a public opinion that will cause the lawful authority to act accordingly, even if it is not for twenty, thirty or fifty years (!). Now we are who we think so are actually individual people living apart from one another. We don’t know anything about the other, with the exception of the few who publish articles or books. There is very likely a very large number of religious and well-educated people in the Catholic world who think like us. I have now believed that it would be very useful for the propaganda of our ideas to at least know us. Tonight we are meeting here, only a few, for an initial understanding … “(70).” He added, raising his voice and speaking more slowly, his eyes fixed on Abbe Marinier, that it was appropriate for the time being do not say anything about the meeting or the decisions that would be made, and he urged everyone to to consider oneself committed to silence by word of honor. Then he developed his thought and the purpose of this meeting again in a little more detail than had happened at dinner “(71).

“We probably agree that the Catholic Church is comparable to an old temple which, originally of noble simplicity, of great religious spirituality, was disfigured and overloaded with all kinds of flourishes and stucco work through the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Perhaps the malevolent among them will notice that only a dead language is spoken aloud in it, that living languages ​​are hardly spoken softly, and the sun shines colored in through the windows. But I can’t believe we can all agree on the quality and quantity of the remedies. And I would therefore think it would be more correct that one, before going to the establishment of this Catholic Freemasonry progressed, agreed on the nature of the reforms. Yes, I want to go further. I believe that even if there was complete agreement of ideas among them, I would not advise them to bind themselves with a tangible bond. 

My concerns are very delicate. They confidently believe that they can swim well underwater like cautious fish, and they do not think that the keen eye of the sublime fisherman or one of his deputies will do themvery well discover and a well-aimed blow of the harpoon can catch them. Well, I would never advise the finest, tastiest, most sought-after fish to bond with each other. They understand what has to happen when one is caught and pulled to the surface. And you know very well that the great fisherman in Galilee put the fish in his pond, but the great fisherman in Rome bakes them “(72).

The aim was to establish a secret union of all like-minded people, a Catholic Freemasonry, where the word was uttered that sounds almost prophetic: “The reforms will be realized one day, the thoughts are stronger than the people and make their way” (73) have made their way exactly in fifty years. But the other has also happened: The great fisherman in Rome pulled the fish to the surface. It was Pius X. who in his encyclical “Pascendi” of September 8, 1907 pronounced the condemnation of modernism. It is deeply to be regretted that this circular was not reprinted, so that every reader can immediately see for himself how everything that is called new and progressive today was already expressed back then, i.e. is neither new nor progressive.

Let us now begin with a brief outline of the circular. The Pope regrets that the modernist errors “have appeared in the bosom of the Church, even within the clergy. These enemies of the church pose as “reformers of the church” and, with blasphemous impudence, depress the divine person of the Redeemer into a mere wretched person “. The modernists are “worse than all other enemies of the church” because they “lend a hand to the roots, to the faith and to the deepest fibers of the faith. They are extremely nimble and shrewd”. “They alternately play the role of the rationalist and the Catholic with such skill that they can easily pull any harmless person to their errors.” They no longer recognize authority and “don’t want to accept any more restrictions. The Catholic faith itself is at risk. To remain silent for longer would be a sin. We have to talk, we have to tear off their masks in front of the whole church. “

After this spirited introduction, the Pope takes up the errors in detail. Since, according to the modernists, God cannot be recognized from visible things, the so-called motiva credibilitatis are no longer used – even today they are hardly mentioned any more. As far as history is concerned, it should be explained as “as if God actually did not intervene”. Therefore, from the history of Christ, too, “everything that looks divine is to be deleted.” “There are Catholics, there are even some priests who profess this publicly, and with such madness they want to renew the Church. There is certainly no more thorough “clearing up of all supernatural order.” As far as dogmas in general are concerned, “they are only inadequate signs for its content, symbols”.

The Pope closes this passage with the sharp words: “In the frenzy of their arrogant arrogance of knowledge, these blind guides even perverted the eternally true concepts of truth and religion; they have established a new system, and in a wild, rampant hunt for something new, they forget to seek the truth where their safe place is; The holy, apostolic traditions are despised and other doctrines are called to the rescue, which are vain and vain and uncertain and do not have the approval of the Church; and with this they believe in their delusion that they can support and hold the truth themselves. “

We would be surprised if the claim had not already been made at that time that “all religions are true.” The same applies to the question “whether Christ worked real miracles, really foresaw the future, whether he really rose and ascended to heaven “. Just as today, God was already transferred into man at that time: “God is immanent in man.” Like the dogmas before, the sacraments are “merely symbols or signs”. At this point the Pope adds a remark that could be written today: “As an example, to show the nature of their work, certain keywords are pointed out which, as one would say,“ pull ”because they are used for propaganda powerful and exciting ideas have great traction. “

The parallelism to our time is particularly evident in the modernist statements about the church: “In earlier times there was a mistake that authority was introduced into the church from outside, namely directly through God. That is why they could be considered autocratic. This view has now been overcome. Authority, like the church, thus arises from religious consciousness and must therefore submit to it. If it withdraws from him, it becomes tyranny. But we are now living in a time when the feeling of freedom (sensus libertatis) has reached its peak. In state life, democracy (popular regimes) has prevailed … That is why the ecclesiastical authority must also take on democratic forms (auctoritati Ecclesiae officium inest democraticis utendi formis) and all the more so because otherwise its doom is sealed. Because it would be madness to think of reactionary measures in view of the current development of the idea of ​​freedom. Forced pushing back and constriction would lead to an explosion that sweeps away church and religion. “There are already elements here for today’s theology of the revolution. It would be surprising if the alleged triumphalism of the church had not been fought back then raised the demand that the church “should give up all external pomp that is too grandiose in the eyes, because the task of church authority only relates to the clergy”. 

In summary, the Pope says: “The general principle applies here: In a religion that lives, everything is understandable, so it has to change. This is how they come to the development (evolutio), so to speak the quintessence of their entire teaching. Dogma, church, religious cult, the books that we venerate as sacred, and even faith itself, if we do not want to declare them all dead, must be subject to the laws of development. “This development arises” from the conflict of two Forces, one pushing for progress and one conservatively reticent. The conservative element is very strong in the Church; it lies in tradition. Its representative is religious authority, both by right, because it comes to authority, tradition to protect, as well as actually; because authority stands apart from the changing life and is hardly or not at all affected by everything that drives progress. In contrast to this, the force that urges progress and adapts to the deepest needs weaves and works in the consciousness of the laity, especially those who, as they say, are in the midst of the whirlpool of life : The modernists are of the opinion that “their place is and will remain within the Church in order to gradually change the general consciousness”, that is to say the subversive reorganization of today.

In the scripture section we read verbatim: “Hence, the modernists are quite familiar with the distinction between the Christ of history and the Christ of faith.”

One more word about the modernists’ reform concerns, which the Pope reproduces in a kind of catalog. He explains: “What has been said so far is enough to show the boundless, ardent desire for innovation of these people. The same applies to everything that the Catholics have. – The philosophy should be renewed, especially in the clerical seminaries; scholastic philosophy is to be referred to the other systems that have been overcome in the history of philosophy, and the only correct modern philosophy corresponding to our time is to be presented to young people (today existentialism). The dogmas and their development must be reconciled with science and history. – As for catechesis, catechetical writings should only deal with dogmas which are modernized and correspond to the comprehension of the people … The ecclesiastical office (regimen) is to be reformed in every respect, especially on the disciplinary and dogmatic side. It has to adapt internally and externally to their modern consciousness, which is wholly inclined towards democracy; therefore the lower clergy, as well as the lay world, must receive their share in the regime, and the overarching centralized authority must be decentralized. The Roman congregations for the various ecclesiastical affairs, especially those of the Holy Office and the Index, must also be changed. In morality one appropriates the principle of Americanism that the active virtues take precedence over the passive ones and that their practice must be encouraged before others. – The clergy are expected to show humility and poverty as they reigned in ancient times; In doing so, he should adhere to the modernist ideas in action and conviction. There are even those who, as docile students of the Protestants, also wanted the priest’s celibacy to be lifted. There is absolutely nothing left in the Church that does not have to be reformed according to its recipe. “The Pope then examines how modernism came about and says the following:” There are three main things that modernists think of theirs Beginning against knowing: the scholastic method in philosophy, the authority and tradition of the fathers and the ecclesiastical magisterium – these are the fiercest struggles. Scholastic philosophy and theology are therefore consistently mocked and despised. May this happen out of ignorance or out of fear or, more correctly, for both reasons, one thing is certain: the addiction to innovation is always connected with hatred of scholasticism; and there is no surer sign of incipient affection for modernist doctrines than when one begins to feel aversion to the scholastic method. “

And here is another point that seems very familiar to us when we think of the mass media: “Their own partisans shower the modernists with excessive, never-ending praise, and they welcome their books, which are bursting with innovations from beginning to end with loud applause; the more boldly someone overturns the old and rejects tradition and ecclesiastical teaching, the more learned he is; and when the ecclesiastical condemnation finally hits one, he is not only, to the horror of all good Catholics, loudly and publicly praised by the whole crowd, but is worshiped almost as a martyr of truth. – The young people let themselves be confused and moved by all the noise, these praise and diatribes;

But that is one of the tricks with which the modernists sell their goods. They leave no stone unturned to increase the number of their followers. At the clerical seminaries and universities they lurk for professorships in order to move them increasingly to the chairs of doom. When they preach in church, they present their doctrines, if perhaps only in hiding; they speak more freely in meetings. In short, in agitation, in word and writing, everywhere they develop a truly feverish activity. “

If one studies the whole encyclical in this way, one is struck by the – one might almost say – prophetic clairvoyance of this holy Pope, with which, in view of his time, he foresaw ours. Yes, it almost seems as if that encyclical was intended to hit modernism much more strongly than that at the beginning of the century, which had not penetrated the believing people so deeply and so comprehensively for a long time, and what Pius X as a final judgment said about modernism, is actually only being fulfilled today: “Protestantism was the first step; then comes modernism; the end is atheism. “We experience it today in the” God is dead theology “. Yes, Paul VI. is right when he perceives a resurgence of modernist errors today. Pope John XXIII had seen clearly when he said about modernism in 1907: “Woe to that day when these teachings prevail” (75).

But Fogazzaro was also right: it took around 50 years for the thoughts expressed in the small circle at that time to prevail and lead to the crisis in the church that left it far behind at the time of the Reformation.

The response to the encyclical is reflected in a pastoral letter from the German bishops gathered in Cologne on December 10, 1907, in which it says, among other things: “We will have to add to these and similar symptoms and approaches of modernism that sometimes emerge in us to criticize and reform that unfortunately increasing addiction, without profession, without correct judgment and sufficient knowledge, which is the disease of our time and does not stop at any authority, transforming the most venerable institutions according to the “modern consciousness” into the organization and administration of the church would like to introduce incompatible parliamentarism and democracy and is not afraid to appear in public papers and magazines, even in anti-church,to the greatest joy of the opponents, to sell their judgmentless and irreverent statements about church superiors and institutions “(76).

Doesn’t this exactly apply to our time? The syllabus “Lamentabili” of July 3, 1907 is closely related to the encyclical “Pascendi”. 65 modernist propositions or doctrines are rejected here. We will only pick out a few of them where the closeness to the present is particularly striking.

Sentence 1 reads: “The interpretation of the holy books given by the Church is not to be despised, but is subject to more precise assessment and correction by the exegetes.”

Sentence 30: “In all texts of the Gospel the name” Son of God “is only synonymous with the name” Messiah “, but in no way does it mean that Christ is really and essentially the Son of God.”

Sentence 36: “The resurrection of Christ is not actually a fact of historical order, but a fact neither proven nor provable, purely supernatural order, which the Christian consciousness has gradually derived from others.”

Sentence 37: “Initially, the belief in the resurrection of Christ was not so much about the fact of the resurrection as about the immortal life of Christ with God.”

Sentence 49: “As the Christian Lord’s Supper gradually took the form of a liturgical act, those who usually presided over the Lord’s Supper acquired the priestly character.”

Sentence 53: “The organic constitution of the church is not unchangeable, but Christian society, like human society, is subject to constant development.”

Sentence 58: “Truth is not more unchangeable than man himself, since it unfolds with him, in him and through him.”

That may be enough. If you look at all of this – actually all 65 sentences should be quoted – a holy anger grips us because we dare to present everything as new and modern and progressive in accordance with the spirit of the 2nd Vatican Council, while it is only warmed up, linguistically new formulated and modernized 50-year-old modernism. It remains incomprehensible that, of all times, the anti-modernist oath, which was prescribed on September 1, 1910, was lifted in our day. And all of this, although the old Lutheran theologian Dr. Dr. Cornelius Freiherr von Heyl said: “Nevertheless, it is unmistakable how extensively Catholicism is protected from enthusiasm and subjectivism by teaching. Individual Catholic authors today talk about the anti-modernist decision of Pius IX. and Pius X. as if this is an embarrassing point! On the other hand, I take the opportunity to say how good it would be if the most essential anti-modernist formulations were mutatis mutandis everywhere in the non-Roman churches as well. Incidentally, it may be that I am more Catholic here than contemporary Catholicism, even if I was pleased with the statements made by the Curia against Teilhard de Chardin … In so far as Catholicism is (and remains) anti-modernist by virtue of the inherent penetrative power of the papal structure, and in this respect if he (on the formal side) saves the concept of obedience in the Church of the present, he would have to give the Old Lutherans, the Old Reformed,(77).

“CRYPTOGAMOUS” HERESY

SO BECAUSE, according to the Pope’s words, “the enemy of the human race” had broken into the innermost realm of the Church, into the “blood of the Church, into its deepest interior”. The holy Pope saw the great danger and put down the enemy. But what Luke said at the end of the story of temptations was repeated: “When the devil had ended all temptations, he left him (Christ) until his time” (4:13).

Until his time. And that started today. This does not mean that in the half century between Pius X and Paul VI. would not have pushed modernist ideas from the underground to the surface here and there. One should only refer to the book by the unnamed Catholic theologians and laypeople, published in 1937: “Catholicism, His Stirb und Werde” (78), which in places breathes a modernist spirit and called for the reply of the Paderborn theologians: “Reform Catholicism” (79 ), to which those theologians and laypeople responded with the script: “The Catholicism of the future, construction and critical defense” (80). In this book Pius X is strongly attacked, with reference to the intrigues of the integralists towards the end of the Pius government X. pointed out which you can read more about in the papal story by Schmidlin (81). Currents aimed at criticizing forms of piety and at a certain softening of the Christian view of life were even more alarming. Two valuable books must be mentioned here, the “Sentire cum Ecclesia” by August Doerner (82) and “Irrwege und Abweg” im Pietysleben der Gegenwart “by Max Kassiepe (83). The deviations that were made in the veneration of Mary had a disastrous effect. Via Fatima, the order of the day was the dogmatization of bodily reception The opportunity of Mary’s in Heaven was doubted, and the consecration of Germany to the Immaculate Heart of Mary met with critical voices. The Marian Pope Pius XII sensed the smoldering and coming calamity. He tried to stop it especially in the encyclical “Humani generis” from the year 1950,where, almost in anticipation of the coming crisis, he spoke of the importance of the ecclesiastical magisterium and said the following with regard to the papal circulars: “It should by no means be assumed that what is presented in the encyclicals does not require consent, because the popes do not exercise the highest power of all their teaching office. Indeed, these encyclicals are expressions of the ordinary magisterium, of which the word of Christ also applies: “He who hears you hears me” (Lk 10:16). Most of the time, what the encyclicals present and inculcate belongs to the Catholic teaching material, as it has already done. When the popes, after careful examination, give a judgment on a previously controversial issue in their writings, then it is clear to all

But with that we are already close to the council. The anthology “Heresies of Time – A Book for Differentiating Spirits”, edited by Anton Böhm (85), is almost like a résumé of the subcutaneous tendencies, a book that has been completely forgotten, although it has been completely forgotten today could still be a guide through the turmoil of our time. None other than Karl Rahner coined the term of the cryptogamous heresies, which, as he believes, exist today to a much greater extent than before. Rahner says literally: Our whole “The space of existence is undoubtedly also shaped by attitudes, doctrines, tendencies that must be qualified as heretical, as contradicting the teaching of the Gospel” (86). These cryptogamous heresies are difficult to determine; For example, “respect for the corporeal and its idolatry are difficult to distinguish in their objectivation.” One can even say: ‘Everyone today is infected by the bacteria and viruses of cryptogamous heresy, even if he does not necessarily qualify as sick from them must be “:” this cryptogamous heresy “is perfectly compatible with” explicit orthodoxy “. Of course, this heresy tries, as it were, to penetrate from the hidden to the surface, so that it could become tangible and ascertainable. But this is opposed by the fact that “today people are afraid of defining concepts in religious questions”. One can now ask what the tactic of this heresy consists of “in order to remain latent”. Rahner replies: Heresy has the worst effect in the form of “indifference”. If we allow all of these examples to work on us, then our eyes will see an exact picture of our present situation. The Magisterium can proclaim the truth, it can conceptually formulate such heretical tendencies, as happened for the first time in the modernism encyclical Pius X. It but can do little against the silent heresy itself. ” In order to reject it to some extent, it would have to be overcome “out of the inner nature of the matter” and not “through the mere administrative route”. Here is the reason

Karl Rahner continues to claim that the fight against cryptogamous heresy is therefore above all given up to the conscience of the individual. In this context he makes a statement that is downright prophetic when we consider the development of the Church today. He says: “All or most of the postulates of today or tomorrow will have something absolutely correct or justifiable or historically inevitable about them, even in so far as they mean a distancing from the lifestyle of earlier generations, including Christian generations.” He believes that “The cryptogamous heresy, especially where it wants to remain latent, like a heresythe wrong dosage, the exaggeration, the one-sidedness “and how it” depends today on the emphasis, the dosage and weight distribution and how difficult it is for the ecclesiastical teaching office to face this task “(87). So much for this excellent introduction.

SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL

AND NOW we have reached the 2nd Vatican Council. We have already seen how much they wanted a council in secret societies. In the high spirits of the early days, this was ignored at all (88) and the opponents paid far too little attention to the assessments of what happened in the Council. And yet such things are often judged more sharply and accurately from the outside than by the actors themselves. An issue of the magazine “Ost -problem” (89) is immensely informative here, where an article taken from the Moscow magazine “Kommunist” (90) deals with “Religious” Renewal “and the Catholic Church”. The subheadings of this article alone are noteworthy, for example, “The Current Crisis of Religion”, “Modernism (! ) in the politics of the church and in theology “,” The social function of “renewal” “. The tenor of the extensive article is to present the change in the church as “the opportunistic tactics of the churchmen and all their tricks”Sees crisis and that one lists almost exhaustively all its symptoms. So there is talk of the “crisis of religious ideology”, of the “modernization of the ecclesiastical position both in the literal theological, religious questions, as well as in the current problems of world politics”. “In the area within the church, which is actually religious, a modernization of the ideological arsenal, of the cult and of the organization itself is taking place. Here is the process of a peculiar Reformationin full swing, we are looking for new ways to maintain the influence of religion in our age of increasing godlessness, anti-clericalism and free-thinking and to shed new light on reason, science and religion “…” The dialectic of the process of religious renewal taking place before our eyes consists in the fact that this renewal is a sign of the weakness of religion, but at the same time is a means of increasing their influence. Therefore, the exposure of the latest methods of defense of reactionary religious theology requires the energetic efforts of all adherents of the materialist worldview, advocates of scientific ideology. “

It is precisely this last sentence that should be read and reconsidered repeatedly by those who, with their aggiornamento, want to bring about an inner change in those atheistic ideologies. The activity of John XXIII. and the Second Vatican Council are judged as ways of revaluing values ​​- a word that makes us think (91).

That was in 1964. The Italian Communist Party expressed itself even more clearly at its 11th Party Congress. In the introduction to a special issue of the “Propaganda” “dedicato al dialogo con Cattolici” one clearly speaks of the “crisis” of the Church: “The extraordinary awakening of the Council, which is rightly compared with the General Estates of 1789, has shown the whole world that the foundations of the old politico-religious Bastille have been shaken. This created a new situation that would have to be met with appropriate means. There was a hitherto unforeseen opportunity to come closer to our final victory with a suitable maneuver. ” This introduction then outlines the various sections of this ‘Speciale’ and says e.g. B. in the section ‘Documentation’ that here, Humanism. Paul VI receives Comrade Gromyko in the Vatican and talks to him about the problems of peace. Marxism-Leninism adapts to the new state of affairs, and it is flexible or violent, depending on the situation … The section “Arguments” … contains numerous references to the decisions made by the Council. “In this way the council itself gives us the best means free of charge to reach the Catholic public.” And the end of this introduction reads: “Mai la situazione ci e stata cosi favorevole, the situation has never been like this for us Cheap.”

It will have to be admitted that these texts speak a clear language. It would be advisable that all those who disregard the warning and admonishing statements of the Pope, carefully consider these omissions just quoted.

At the same time illuminating and frightening is the fact that the Council has been compared with the storming of the Bastille of 1789, i.e. with the French Revolution, and we have already shown that this is not so absurd. In any case, the fundamental ideas of the revolution – freedom, equality and fraternity – have been brought into the consciousness so strongly that one can hardly imagine a reduction to the important and justified level. It is still too early to give a final judgment on the council. But the fateful thing is that such great events touch different levels, even take place on different levels. Certainly the texts are quite orthodox, in places formulated almost classically, and our task will be for a long time to come Wasn’t the cryptogamous attack on the “old political-religious bastille” of the papacy lurking in collegiality? Didn’t the struggle for the “nota explica-tiva praevia”, which was added to the church constitution (93), prove that? The opponent also gives an explanation that is clear and informative. The “Voices of the Time” (94) had an article under the heading “Have the Freemasons changed”? The author refers to the European Freemasons newspaper (95), which discussed the problem of the papacy in its September 1964 issue and said of the Council of Constance (1414 to 1418): “The reformers couldn’t get away with the hierarchical constitution of the church with the omnipotent Pope at the top has remained to this day. ” After this excursion into the history of the Council, the author returns to Vatican II: “To break the personal primacy of the Pope would be the prerequisite for the Unio sancta and for the unification of the Church. – We believe with a fair degree of certainty that we can say that the Pope’s infallibility and his primacy over the Council will not be broken in 1964 either. In the area of ​​the church constitution, the Middle Ages will continue to protrude into our time – we think: not for the benefit of the church and the modern problems that have to be overcome. And as long as the personal supremacy of an individual in the church constitution is not removed, we believe that any reform in other areas will also fail. The constitutional power of the Pope and his appointed cardinals is the institutional obstacle to any better understanding and reform. On the other hand, if the privilege and infallibility of the Pope are removed, the Church can no longer exercise the power of suggestion over the masses of the believing population as it has before. The Church and the Council are therefore in an indissoluble dilemma here. We do not believe that the Council in Rome this year will be able to deal with these things, however much the symptoms will be mended. ” 

AND TODAY?

WHAT THEN, around ten years ago, still had a question mark, has now taken on very clear contours. The primacy of the Pope has suffered severe losses and the “gates of hell” that fight against the rock are already advanced so far that they come close to the porta di bronzo of the Vatican. The Pope is right: the devil is in them Church collapsed. Of course, we still lack an analysis of his methods, which one could easily recognize if one only adhered to the statements of the New Testament about him. Only some of these of his methods are mentioned. To camouflage the angel of light “(2 Cor 11:14) by throwing the divine gift of reason into the pan: Everything that happens today in the form of reforms in the church, can be reasonably justified. The need of the times also does something else, and what was only permitted as an exception for mission areas, for example, becomes a habit for us too. Why not? One generally fearfully avoids the open fight against truths of faith, one makes it more elegant, one no longer talks about them, or one mutilates them into half statements in the certain knowledge that half truths are worse than whole lies. 

Finally, the new is brought into such close proximity to the “old” truths that a strong dose of the gift of the spirit of the “discretio spirituum, the differentiation of spirits” (1 Cor 12, 10) is part of it, in order to convert the genuine from the false and the truth to distinguish from falsehood. When you study these methods, you come to the conclusion that that the devil today does not place so much emphasis on remaining undetected and “cryptogamously” operating his work of destruction, but rather that he wants to manifest himself openly and publicly ) in 1968 quite frankly: “Among the pillars that collapse most easily, we note the power of teaching; the infallibility, which the First Vatican Council believed to be firmly established and which just had to endure the storms of the married couple on the occasion of the publication of the encyclical «Humanae vitae»; the real Eucharistic presence which the Church was able to impose on the medieval masses and which will disappear with the progress of intercommunions and intercelebrations of Catholic priests and Protestant pastors; the sacred character of the priest, which comes from the institution of the sacrament of ordination and which will give way to a temporary election; the distinction between the instructing church and the black (lower) clergy, where from now on the movement from the base (!) upwards takes place as in every democracy; the gradual disappearance of the ontological and metaphysical character of the sacraments and then immediately the death of confession, after sin has become a completely anachronistic concept in our time, which the strict medieval philosophy, this heirloom of biblical pessimism, had bequeathed to us.

“In The whole strategy is developed here with “pleasant” open-heartedness, and one only wonders why nothing or so little happens, to secure these pillars and prevent them from collapsing. Anyone who, in view of these unambiguous confessions, still thinks today that the processes in the church are marginal phenomena or transitional difficulties that subside by themselves after a while, simply cannot be helped. But the responsibility of the leading men in the church is all the greater if they do not deal with these questions and think – compare what was said earlier – that they can fix everything with a patchwork. No, it is about the whole thing, it is about the Church, it is, as the magazine “L’Humanisme” writes from May-October 1968 (97), about “a kind of Copernican revolution” that has broken out over the Church; it is about a “gigantic revolution in the church” (98),(99) already carries within itself.

And now we have reached the climax, and we just wish that the following quotation from L’Humanisme would be recognized in its full scope (100): “When the traditional structures collapse, all the rest will follow. The Church has such a contestation was not foreseen, nor is it prepared for a long time to absorb this revolutionary spirit and assimilate itself … It is not the scaffold that awaits the Pope, it is the rise of the local churches, which are democratically organized, the barriers between clergy and lay people who create their own dogma and who live in complete independence with regard to Rome. “

We return to the beginning. In his pastoral letter, Athanasius lists what happened in Alexandria at that time: “Church robbery, arson, blasphemy, desecration of virgins, flogging and murder.” Are the local churches not emerging or already in full activity when they submit to the majority and thus to the often arbitrary number and not to the truth at synods through democratic votes? “It will soon no longer be possible for the Vatican be “, says the mentioned magazine (101)” to keep under control the inner movements of a large body, which was thought to be homogeneous … Wouldn’t it be time to return to more «national» churches? “- So the scaffold is not waiting for the Pope. How humane our time has become! Only the local churches are waiting for the Pope, he has to come to terms with them. One can to point to examples of the past, the word falls of the Gallican Church. Here history is allowed again, if one otherwise deliberately remains silent about it and the whole tradition. At the end of the development, however, the Pope is superfluous because the local churches “Live in complete independence with regard to Rome”. 

So the scaffold in the form of annihilation. One can point to examples from the past; the word about the Gallican Church is mentioned. Here history is allowed again, if one is otherwise deliberately silent about it and the whole tradition. At the end of the development, however, the Pope is superfluous because the local churches “live in complete independence with regard to Rome”. So the scaffold in the form of annihilation. One can point to examples from the past; the word about the Gallican Church is mentioned. Here history is allowed again, if one is otherwise deliberately silent about it and the whole tradition. At the end of the development, however, the Pope is superfluous because the local churches “live in complete independence with regard to Rome”. So the scaffold in the form of annihilation.

We are very grateful for this open language. We now know where we are. The Luciferian plan is clear and open before us.

CONCLUSION

From Athanasius

“THEREFORE, however, you must not fear their malice, but must … be indignant about the new machinations against us. For if one member suffers, everyone suffers with it, and according to the apostle’s word, weep with those who weep. As the great Church suffers, everyone must tolerantly see that the offense receives its punishment. For everyone is the Redeemer who is reviled by them, it is all laws that are dissolved by them … For all these reasons I ask you … to condemn the wicked, so that the priests here and the people also now to see your right faith and your resolute rejection and to be able to rejoice in your unanimous faith in Christ, but those who have so greatly wronged themselves in the Church, be induced to repent and – even if it should be possible late – to come to a change of mind. Greet the fellowship of the brothers with you! All the brothers gathered with me greet you. May the Lord keep you intact and in faithful remembrance for us … “

From Görres

“The earth is shaking underfoot; the tools that are counted on fail; some kind of catastrophe that one does not expect occurs and the whole building, which has long been undermined, collapses. That the Church will emerge unscathed from such a collapse can be foreseen with certainty; but what else would outlast it, no one can know or estimate. So admonish, warn, wave, defend, call out all the signs; Even the animals, on which the false prophets ride ahead, tree, turn back, and speak angrily in human language to their drivers, who do not see the flaming sword flickering in their way … Therefore work when it is still daylight.

Nobody can work at night. Waiting is also nothing for all waiting has since served only to worsen the situation in a rapidly increasing proportion. If one finds oneself in an unequal dispute with one another, there can be no doubt about it, if one only looks at those who one has for oneself. One may argue back and forth about principles, light and wind divided equally with equal sincerity. But when all lies and all bad passions crowd around a banner like vultures around a carrion that falls by the way; then it is certainly not the Labarum under whose sign a good quarrel is fought. Because the bad has its instincts, which do not lead it astray on its way. But a power that sees all these tracks directed against itself has every cause to be frightened, and in times of serious consideration to be careful about the outcome. For her part, the Church, which is pure and clear in her good rights, can remain unmoved in good rest; because who is like God! is written in flames on her shield, and before this saying all earthly splendor pales into nothingness, and all earthly power faints “(from the epilogue to the fourth edition of” Athanasius “, Easter 1838) (102).

NOTES

(1) Berthold Altaner, Patrologie (Freiburg i. Breisgau 1950 2 ), p. 230.

(2) Konrad Kirch, Heroes of Christianity (Paderborn 1936 5 ): From Christian antiquity p. 12 f.

(3) Joseph Görres, Athanasius (Regensburg 1838), 4th edition.

(4) Joseph Lortz, History of the Church from the perspective of the history of ideas (Münster i. W. 1941) § 111 B (IV, 52).

(5) Franz Schnabel, German History in the 19th Century, Volume IV, The Religious Forces (Freiburg 1937) p. 139.

(6) aaO, S. VI.

(7) ibid.

(8) ebd. S. VII.

(9) ibid. P. VIII; cf. Roman Pencil, Searching for a New Confession, in “Deutsche Tagespost” of January 12/13, 1973.

(10) ebd. S. 113.

(11) ebd. S. 118.

(12) Bergstadtverlag Breslau. – On the author cf. Gerhard Kukofka, “Staunen und Sehnsucht” in “Urbild und Abglanz”; Festgabe for Herbert Doms, ed. by Johannes Tenzler (Regensburg 1972) I, pp. 489-497.

(13) ibid. Cf. 491, note 1: “Note the eminently prophetic gift of the writer Flam … Has it partly become a reality that is far exceeded?

(14) aaO, S. 489.

(15) K. Flam, aaO, S. 84.

(16) Selected writings from St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church, in the Library of the Church Fathers (Kösel-Pustet, Munich 1925) Volume I, p. 121.

(17) ebd. S. 129.

(18) ibid.

(19) ebd. S. 139.

(20) ebd. S. 137.

(21) ebd. S. 143.

(22) ebd. S. 163; Quote 2 Thess 2, 3-4.

(23) K. Kirch aaO, Band I, 2; S. 23 f.

(24) Ri 19, 29-20, 11.

(25) “Osservatore Romano” of December 8, 1968;
cf. also Helmut Kuhn in his contribution to the special issue of the magazine “Word and Truth” (March / April 1972): “The State of the Roman Catholic Church”: “In the summer In Paris in 1970 I spoke to Raymond Aron, arguably the most important sociologist in France, about the student riots at European and American universities, and we agreed that these events, disastrous as they might be, would be overshadowed by another Happened on a worldwide scale and of epochal importance – through the collapse of the Roman Catholic Church “(p. 155).

(26) Migne, Patr. Graec. Volume 27 (Athanasius I) col. 219-240; see Bar-denhewer, History of Early Christian Literature (Freiburg 1902/1932) Volume III, p. 70; Real Lexicon for Antiquity and Christianity (Stuttgart 1950) Volume I Athanasius col. 863. I owe the translation of this circular to Fr. Benedikt Busch, Metten Abbey.

(27) KNA No. 194 of November 21, 1972: “The thing with the devil”, reactions to the Pope’s speech of November 15, 1972, cf. German edition of the “Osservatore Romano”, 2nd year No. November 1972, p. 1.

(28) aaO, S. 162 f.

(29) Marquis de la Franquerie, L’infallibilite pontifale – The syllabus and the current crisis of the Church (als Manuskript gedruckt, o. J.) S. 41 ff.

(30) “In this kind will be recognized by insane and dark, almost seems to be the very point where Satan is Jesus Christ burns, the insatiable desire for revenge hatred” in Enzyklika “human race” vom 20. April 1884 Uber die Freimaurer.

(31) in his circular “Pascendi” of September 8, 1907.

(32) Albert Erhard, Early Church and Early Catholicism (Bonn 1935) p. 194.

(33) Furche-Verlag 1964 pp. 15-39.

(34) cf. “Neue Zürcher Zeitung” of August 20, 1966: “Church-theological disputes in the Federal Republic; the confessional movement as a symptom of crisis” and in it as a subheading “Aspects of the Enlightenment”.

(35) aaO, S. 119-121.

(36) Max Spindler, Handbuch der Bayerischen Geschichte Volume II, 1028-1032 (Munich 1966) p. 1028: “The history of the Illuminati Order is a phenomenon of European importance and effect”; cf. Serge Hutin, Gouvemants invisibles et societes secretes ( EditionsJ’ai lu 1971) keeps coming back to Illuminatentum.

(37) Bernhard Fay, La Franc-Maconnerie and the Intellectual Revolution of the XVIIF siecle (Paris 1961) S. 203.

(38) Pierre Virion, Le Complot (Paris oJ) S. 46.

Serge Hutin aaO, S. 4 zitiert Pierre Mariel, L’Europe Pai’enne duXX e siecle, p. 170: “In fact, at all times – and now more than ever – secret companies rule the world”.

(39) Eugen Lennhoff / Oscar Posner, Internationales Freemaurerlexikon (unaltered reprint of the 1932 edition), Amalthea-Verlag Munich-Zurich-Vienna; – Horst E. Miers, Lexicon of Secret Knowledge (Freiburg i. Breis’gau 1970); – Kurt Seligmann, Das Weltreich der Magic (Stuttgart 1958).

(40) Pierre Virion, Mystere d’Iniquite (Editions St. Michel, St.-Cenere [53] oJ) S. 2 ff; vgl. auch Virion, Soon a world government ?, im gleichen Verlag 1968; vgl. auch Leon de Poncins, Christia-nisme and F.-. M.-. (L’Ordre Francais, December 1969); The F.-, M.-. according to its secret documents Diffusion de la Pensee Francaise 1972).

(41) in the Swiss newspaper “Der Republikaner” No. 39 of September 26, 1963.

(42) cf. these names in the lexicons mentioned.

(43) in Virion, Mysteries aaO, pp. 81-108.

(44) Alec Mellor, Our Separate Brothers The Freemasons (German translation) (Styria Graz-Wien-Cologne 1964). – Michel Dierickx SJ Freemasonry, The Great Unknown (Bauhüttenverlag Frankfurt / Hamburg 1968).

(45) in Virion, Mystere loc. Cit., P. 15 f; the satan hymn by Giosue Car-ducci can be found in Gerhard Zacharias, Satanskult und Schwarze Messe (a contribution to the phenomenology of religion) (Limes-Verlag Wiesbaden 1964), pp. 133-138.

(46) Virion, Mystere op. Cit., P. 19 ff. The following quotations are taken from this book and the above-mentioned Franquerie work.

(47) bei Franquerie aaO, S. 48.

(48) ebd. S. 48.

(49) ibid. P. 51, note 20.

(50) ibid. P. 50, note 14.

(51) ibid. P. 53, note 24.

(52) bei Virion, Mytere aaO, S. 41.

(53) ebd. S. 32.

(54) ebd. S. 42.

(55) ebd. S. 52 f.

(56) Yves Marsaudon, L’Oecumenisme vu par un Franc-Macon de Tradition (Editions Vitiano Paris-IX e ) 1964.

(57) JM Jourdan, L’oecumenisme vu par un Franc-Macon de Tradition (reprinted from the magazine “Permanences” 1965), S. 11.

(58) Marsaudon aaO, S. 26.

(59) ebd. S. 120.

(60) bei Jourdan aaO, S. 27.

(61) Marsaudon aaO, S. 126.

(62) Franquerie aaO, S. 46.

(63) ibid.

(64) Franquerie (p. 44) relocates the above-mentioned secret instructions to the year 1819; GM Pachtler (The silent war against throne and altar or the negative of Freemasonry, according to documents, Amberg, 2nd edition 1876, p. 83) and names the full title “Istruzione permanente, Codice e quida pratica dei Preposti all’alta massoneria” (Original text in the “Civiltä cattol.” 4 sett. 1875 quod. 605, p. 598 e se gg.).

It says: Our “idea is the liberation of Italy, from which on a certain day the liberation of the whole world, the brotherly republic and the unification of humanity must proceed … Our goal is rather that of Voltaire and the French Revolution: ie complete annihilation of Catholicism and even of the Christian idea … The Pope, whoever he is, will never come to the secret societies; therefore the secret connections must take the first step towards the Pope and the Church, with the intention of captivating both. The work we do is not the work of a day, month or year. It can take many years, maybe a century. 

We do not intend to win the Pope over to our cause, to make of him a neophyte of our principles or an apostle of our ideas. That would be a ridiculous dream. And however events may take shape, even if a cardinal or prelate with a full heart or cunning would become the initiate of our secrets, we ought not to want his elevation to the chair of Peter for that very reason. Yes, this elevation of his would also be our ruin. For just as he would have come to apostasy out of mere ambition, so too should the need for power determine him to sacrifice us. 

What we are looking for and what we must wait for, like the Jews for their Messiah, that is a Pope according to our needs … So in order to make a Pope according to our hearts, it is above all a matter of giving this future Pope a gender raising, which is worthy of the regiment we want. The old people and the mature men have to be left aside. Instead, go straight to the youth and where possible even to the childhood … Once your good reputation in the colleges, grammar schools, universities and seminars has been firmly established, once you have won the trust of professors and young people, make sure that that especially the candidates of the spiritual class visit your company … In several years this young clergy will hold all offices through the power of circumstances. He will rule, administer, judge, form the council of the sovereign (Pope), and be called to elect the future Pope …

Do not stretch your networks, like Simon Barjona, inside the sacristies, seminaries and convents in the depths of the sea. And if you do not rush into anything, we promise you an even more wonderful fishing trip than that of St. Peter. The fisherman became a fisherman of men, and you will fish friends even at the feet of the Apostolic See. So then you have a revolution in the net in tiara and cloak, at the top of which the cross and the great papal flag are carried; a revolution that only needs a little help to set fire to all four parts of the world … “(in Pachtler, op. cit., pp. 84, 87, 91 f, 92, 94 f). at the top of which the cross and the great papal flag are carried; a revolution that only needs a little help to set fire to all four parts of the world … “(in Pachtler, op. cit., pp. 84, 87, 91 f, 92, 94 f). at the top of which the cross and the great papal flag are carried; a revolution that only needs a little help to set fire to all four parts of the world … “(in Pachtler, op. cit., pp. 84, 87, 91 f, 92, 94 f).

 (65) dated August 6, 1964; cf. my contribution “Ecclesiam suam – the inaugural encyclical of Paul VI.” in Wilhelm Sandfuchs, Das Wort der Päpste (Würzburg 1966), pp. 212-224.

(66) “We see them again.”

(67) 3rd year 1905/6, 1st volume, pp. 553-567.

(68) ebd. S. 553.

(69) ebd. S. 555 f.

(70) ebd. S. 422.

(71) ebd. S. 522.

(72) ebd. S. 524 f vgl. auch Emmanuel Barbier, Masonic infiltrations in the church (Mont-Notre-Dame Aisne 1910) S. 8 f.

(73) Hochland aaO, S. 525.

(74) For the following we use the collection of the “Circulars of our Holy Father Pius X., 2 volumes 1909 and 1916, here Volume I, pp. 185-305, published by Herder (Freiburg).

(75) Franz Michel Willam, From the young Angelo Roncalli 1903-1907 to Pope Johannes XXIII. 1958-1963 (Innsbruck 1967) p. 90.

(76) Pastoral letter of the Cologne Bishops’ Conference of December 10, 1907, in “Circular” Pius X. loc. Cit., Volume II, p. 27.

(77) from the magazine “Una Sancta” (Kyrios Verlag Meitingen 1964) p. 250.

(78) edited by Gustav Mensching.

(79) Reform Catholicism, an answer to the book: Der Katholizismus. His death and development (Paderborn 1938).

(80) edited by Hermann Mulert (Leopold Klotz Verlag, Leipzig 1940).

(81) Josef Schmidlin, Papal History of the Latest Time (Munich 1936) Volume III, pp. 162-169.

(82) August Doerner, Sentire cum Ecclesia (printed as manuscript) 1941.

(83) Max Kassiepe, wrong ways and detours in the pious life of the present (Würzburg 1940).

(84) by Janet E. 42 (1950) S. 568.

(85) Freiburg-Basel-Vienna 1961; Karl Rahner, What is Heresy? Pp. 9-44.

(86) ebd. S. 34.

(87) ebd. S. 34 f; 36, 38 f, 40 f;

It is striking that the table of contents of the Herder correspondence until 1968, after the editorials, contained the statements of the ecclesiastical teaching office: a) the Pope b) the Curia c) the Episcopat, while from 1968 on the statements of the Pope under the heading “Pope” must be added to the letter P.

(88) How little impression did z. B. the anonymous writing distributed only to the Council Fathers: “L’azione Guidaico-Massonica nel Concilio”

(89) Volume 18 No. 14/15 (Bonn July 29, 1966). The whole issue deals with the position of communism in relation to world religions (Islam, Catholic Church, Protestant theology, collapse of the biblical worldview, etc.)

 (90) No. 15, 1964.

(91) Ostprobleme aaO, S. 452.

(92) Karl Rahner – Herbert Vorgrimler, Small Council Compendium (Herderbücherei Volume 270/71/72/73; 1966) p. 26: “The Council was a pastoral council”.

(93) ebd. S. 197-200.

(94) by Franz Hillig Volume 175 1965, pp. 97-106.

(95) Edited by Wolfgang Stammberger (Baden-Baden / Strasbourg).

(96) cited in Virion, Le Complot, loc. Cit., P. 109.

(97) ebd. S. 102.

(98) ebd. S. 104.

(99) ibid.

(100) ibid.

(101) ebd. S. 105.

(102) S. 197 f.

Worthy of leading us, you indomitable defender of the divinity of Christ. Listen to our calls; because you are kind and helpful.

Inspire us, guide us, pray for us the Most Holy Trinity that we, like you, endure to the end.

Remember the Christian East.

Would you like to meet us at the hour of death with the holy angels, your face enlightened by the Holy Spirit, in the splendor of your youth and your knowledge, just as you appeared to the people of Alexandria, who joyfully greeted you as bishop.

Introduce us to Christ our God. We choose you to be a leader in the struggle that we are by your side for the Nicene Faith.

Imprimatur: Cairo, July 12, 1971 Stephanos I Sidarouss, Cardinal-Patriarch of Alexandria

Through the intercession of St. Athanasius save the Church, O Redeemer!

15th edition (37th thousand), January 2000

Translations are available in English, French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish.

J. Kral, publishing house printer • 93326 Abensberg

Origins of a Fake P2 List

The Italian website and Youtube channel, Italia Misterio, is a helpful source of authentic evidence in the search for clues about Masonic infiltration into the Vatican’s financial departments. In fact, it is a good source of material on Vatican intrigues and Masonry in general.

New videos are being constantly released, which show photographs, newspaper clippings and testimonies from witnesses at the trials of some of the most infamous Vatican-related personalities like Licio Gelli, Michael Sindona and Roberto Calvi. Even Archbishop Marcinkus and Pope John Paul I occasionally get a mention.

One video entitled “The Real P2 List” caught my eye. This article looks at the content of that video, with some facts checked and a few more details added.

Licio Gelli’s List

On March 17, 1981, Gelli’s Abruzzo villa was searched by members of the Guardia di Finanza. The search had been secretly ordered by Magistrate Gherardo Colombo, who was hoping to find missing money belonging to the Vatican-swindler Michele Sindona. Sindona and the primary accomplice in his staged kidnapping, the Freemason Joseph Micalli, had both been seen in the Arezzo area prior to the raid. Apparently, Micalli was ostensibly visiting his dentist, but Colombo was suspicious.

The raid on Arezzo’s villa found nothing of interest, but a search of Gelli and Micalli’s Company Giole, which operated as a front for their illegal activities, turned up something very interesting. Police found a suitcase full of documents, the most notable of which was a list of one thousand names of men said to be members of the infamous P2 Lodge.

Immediately upon the document being found, Orazio Giannini, the General Commander of the Guardia di Finanza, confided to his employees that his name would be on the list. Among others on the list were: two government Ministers, five Undersecretaries, 33 Parliamentarians, twelve Generals of the Carabinieri, five Generals of the Guardia di Finanza, 22 Italian Army Generals, four Air Force Generals and many magistrates and state officials, including Silvio Berlusconi. Also included on the list were Gelli himself, as well as other personalities linked to financial scandals involving the Vatican Bank – Roberto Calvi, Michele Sindona, Umberto Ortolani and Mino Peccorelli.

The discovery of the list and the subsequent raid on the Grand Lodge’s Rome headquarters led Italy’s Grand Orient Lodge to cut its ties with Gelli. In 1982, it is said to have dissolved P2 completely.

Although there is little doubt that the organisation has remained active in some form, discovery of the list and legal action against its corrupt, high-ranking members was the beginning of the end of P2’s popularity. Rumours began to circulate suggesting that P2 had never been a legitimate Lodge and that it was part of a KGB plot to destabilise Europe. While it is true that P2 members were implicated in murderous terrorist attacks, it is more likely, as author Martin Short suggests, that the Grand Lodge of London started those rumours to discredit P2. Until that time, the London Lodge had enjoyed a close relationship with its Italian counterpart: later it was in danger of becoming tainted by the scandals surrounding P2.

Gelli escaped to Switzerland where he was arrested, then escaped again and fled to Chile. A bizarre story links Gelli to the desecration of the body of former Argentine President Juan Peron. Peron’s hands were removed and a ransom (which was not forthcoming) was sought. Apart from the money angle, it is thought that the removal of the dictator’s hands was related to an occult practice designed to empower the new owner with Peron’s political charisms.

Gelli Approaches the Masons

According to Italia Mysterio, Gelli later approached his old Lodge, seeking to rejoin it. Gelli allegedly took the list of names to the Grand Master of the Great East Lodge, Ennio Battelli, who flipped through the file, then thrust it back at Gelli, saying, “I’ve never seen it. Take it back.” Gelli apparently tried again with Battelli’s successor, Giuliano Di Bernardo, who also refused to have anything to do with the list.

Gelli remained on the run for many years until he was finally found guilty of a string of crimes and imprisoned. He died in 2015.

Licio Gelli’s will apparently included a map showing the location of 163kg of gold ingots buried at his property in Arezzo. The will also pointed to a huge property and investment portfolio owned by Gelli, which included 172,000 ha in Paraguay, 14 palaces, part ownership in two companies, an orange plantation in Brazil and a 30 ha residential development package in Argentina.

Where are the Cardinals?

Assuming even part of this strange tale is true, we are left with many questions: What did Gelli hope to achieve by taking the list to the Grand Orient Lodge? Blackmail? Influence? If, as the author at Italio Mysterio suggests, this list was fake, then why would Gelli risk trying to pass it off as the true list to the very men who were sure to know the identities of P2’s members, that is, the Grand Masters?

Several theories suggest that Gelli was never the real head of P2. One theory is that this was instead Giulio Andreotti, the Italian politician. There are also rumours of a super-lodge, even more secret and more exclusive than P2.

Another theory is that this was all a huge hoax designed to throw suspicion away from the man believed by Italio Mysterio to be the real head of P2, that is: Umberto Ortolani. With all of this in mind, it is possible that the true P2 list is stashed safely away in an archive somewhere in one of Gelli’s former estates in Paraguay?

If this list was accurate, then where are the prelates whom we have been told – quite credibly – were Masons: Cassaroli, Villot, Tauren, Ravasi – none of these are included in this “P2” list? Remember, Gelli’s list was found only three years after the mysterious death of Pope John Paul I: the man who was ready to completely reshuffle the Curia in order to remove the one hundred or so prelates who had already been identified as Masons.

Is there a connection between the international scrutiny of P2 and the Vatican’s weak pronouncement of the incompatibility of Masonry and Catholicism in the 1983 Code of Canon Law?

What of the presence of the many Argentinian Masons on Gelli’s list? Is it a coincidence that the man who would become Pope was Provincial of the Jesuits in Argentina at the same time P2’s active membership included a strong Argentinian presence?

Revisiting Paul VI’s Masonic Portrait

This article was updated on July 4th, 2021, in order to somewhat reduce the extremities of my speculations – AC

In 1971, Paul VI was presented with a painting, said to be his portrait, and which, to be honest, is one of the more disturbing images this author has come across. The picture emits a demonic violence that almost leaps out of the frame, leaving the viewer feeling oppressed and unsettled.

Most startling of all, the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church is surrounded by cold, dark Masonic symbols, hiding in plain sight.

Hansing described the portrait as showing “the tension-fraught situation of the church, caught in a multiplicity of issues, as reflected in the countenance of the Pope.”

I don’t profess to be the first to discover this particular connection between Pope Paul VI and Masonry – the articles cited in this one are testimony to that. But since I have only just come across this rather disconcerting episode in Paul’s life, I thought I’d write on it anew and add some further research.

Firstly, there are not one but nine versions of this scene. Each tells, I believe, a part of a story that begins at the Second Vatican Council and culminates in the very public accusations that Paul was a homosexual. Shown below are three versions, created in 1970, 1970/1 and 1975 respectively. The third is part of a series of screen prints, which are based on the second painted version of the portrait.

The artist, Ernst Guenter Hansing, was initially associated with Cardinal Josef Frings, for whom he painted two portraits. Hansing had trained under the abstract artist, Fernand Leger, and had mixed with many avant-garde artists of Europe. This of course, would have appealed to Montini, who was known for his love of the cultural elite. Fring invited Hansing, a Lutheran, to observe the final session of Vatican Two in 1965, in order to “internalise the atmosphere.”

Hansing claims to have been struck by the Pope’s meekness, describing Paul as “humility personified” and as a “pleading” or “begging” person. Hansing at once expressed a desire to paint the Pope, so the story goes, wanting to encapsulate the scene presented by the massive Bernini columns dwarfing the humble Pope, he who alone carried the burden of determining the Church’s future. Hansing also wanted to capture the rays of light which issued from the great dome surmounting the canopy. So the story goes.

Paul apparently did not commission a portrait, but was approached by Hansing who was eventually given a room to work from inside the Vatican from 1969. The artist was then allowed to sit in on 13 papal audiences over the next two and a half years to make his sketches. The Pope’s secretary, then-Fr Pasquale Macchi, acted as go-between for the artist and pontiff.

Strangely, the image of the Pope at the centre of the painting was not based on the sketches Hansing made during those many papal audiences. Rather, it is based on a photograph taken during the Pope’s trip to Jerusalem in 1967. A drawing made from that photograph was then transposed onto the “Papacy” work. The many sessions that saw Hansing scrutinising Paul’s speeches were justified by the artist’s need to ‘internalise” the character of Paul.

Upon seeing a working sketch of himself, Paul is said to have uttered the cryptic comment: “One almost needs a new philosophy to grasp the meaning of this in its context.” [Emphasis added.]

The first version of the painting is made from two separate pieces of canvas: one above and one below. The bottom canvas is horizontal and the top one is vertical – which is like an inverted cross when you come to think of it.

Two vertical white blocks – red in the second painting – on either side of the piece are in fact said to represent an inverted cross – the Petrus cross – according to the artist, ostensibly calling to mind the martyrdom of the first Pontiff.

According to Hansing, his trademark blue colour represented “mystical depth” and was more prominent in the second painting. He referred to the use of red as denoting “blood circulation,” and indeed, much of the red in Hansing’s works resembles blood either dripping or in pools.

In the top of the internal space of the real dome, which was designed by Michelangelo, we can find the image of God the Father. In Hansing’s version, God has been replaced by a mere swirl, which could also be interpreted as an All-Seeing Eye, from which emanates a beam of light.

Hansing replaced God the Father
with this ambiguous symbol

A ray of light proceeding from beneath this All-Seeing Eye, seems to pierce the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, then continue vertically downwards right through the person of the Pope. Blood appears to drip down this central axis, through Paul and merging with his own grotesque hands that grasp a threatening dagger-like implement.

A second painting was begun after Fr Macchi and Hansing’s poet friend, Stefan Andrew, suggested to him that the first work was too small. The second work contains a few changes: more “Hansing Blue” is incorporated and the pillars are emphasised. The Pope’s face is “more humble” and the phrase, Pro hominibus constitutus, meaning ‘appointed for service to the people’ – is written in the lower right hand corner. Surprisingly, this motto is also found on Cardinal Frings’ Coat of Arms.

The finished work was a massive 21.6 m x 3.6m (71ft by 12 ft) and was presented to the Pope in 1972.

Cardinal Fring’s Coat of Arms.
Detail from the painting.
No, I can’t read it either.

In his speech at the time the second painting was presented to the Pope, Bishop Wilhem Cleven referred to John’s Gospel, stating “The time comes when someone else girds you and leads you where you do not want to go.” (John. 21:17).

When he saw the finished second portrait, he remarked that the it was “very useful” to make an “act of reflection’ in studying the painting. The artist then went on to make seven screen prints of the portrait, apparently at the behest of Paul, in order that they may be sources of “acts of reflection.”

Interpretation

The definitive explanation of the Masonic symbols found in the work was written by researcher and author, Craig Heimbichner, who detected, among other symbols, the three pillars of Masonry, inverted crosses, pentagrams, and at least one square and compass. Heimbichner also explains that the initiation rite of the 30th degree Mason, the Kadosh Degree, involves thrusting a dagger into the papal tiara. He believes the pope is represented as holding that dagger.

It is certainly true that Paul VI surrendered the Papal Tiara at the start of his pontificate. Could his devastating reforms and the emptying of papal authority on his watch also be considered as “killing” the papacy?

I am not normally given to making wild speculations on subjects that are outside my competency. However, this case is an exception. While we will never know the true meaning of this mysterious episode, or of the paintings themselves, I proffer the following hypothesis. You may like to think of it as fan-fiction:

Paul is represented as both victim and perpetrator in Hansing’s portrait: this is an image of his character and of his pontificate…..

Prior to the conclave, the blackmailable Montini promised his Progressive/Masonic coalition supporters that he would allow sweeping reforms once he was elected Pope. As Pope Paul VI, he went along with changes to the Mass, leaving details to the Freemason Bugnini, and approved the other innovations introduced during and after the Council.

Although the Council reaffirmed the Church’s teaching on birth control, Cardinal Frings later challenged Paul to review the that stance, leading Paul to establish a commission to look into the matter. The commission returned to Paul with their conclusion: birth control should be allowed.

This was a bridge too far for Paul. Already cracks were appearing as the Council’s love-fest aura began to wear off. The unity and renewal Paul had, far too optimistically, hoped for had not eventuated, and his latitude in doctrinal matters was being exploited by those closest to him.

Paul decided to risk the ire of the Masonic brotherhood, stand his ground and defend the Church’s teaching in Humanae Vitae, which was released it in 1968.

Frings and the Masonic forces he represented were furious. Paul needed to be reigned in but they knew him to be pliable and timid. (“Begging” and “pleading”, as Hansing said.) They decided to send him a warning – of the most severe kind. Hansing was conscripted to deliver the message on behalf of the Lodge.

Hansing is moved onsite although he didn’t really need to sketch Paul: he already had chosen the photograph taken in Jerusalem as a model – an indication, perhaps, that the Ecclesiastical Lodge that commissioned him had powerful Jewish connections. He sat in on thirteen of Paul’s Audiences merely to intimidate him.

The pressure mounted and Paul began to waver. He was shown a working sketch of himself and mused aloud: “One almost needs a new philosophy to grasp the meaning of this in its context.” Perhaps that “new philosophy” was something antithetical to Catholic teaching to which Paul had ambivalently subscribed.

Once the first painting was finished, the seriousness of the threat became even more apparent. The looming threat of violence overwhelmed him and Paul sensed that his life may be in danger. The angles of the painting resembled an axe cleaving his skull in two but also represented to him his double-mindedness.

He knew he was under pressure to fulfil the ancient decrees of Masonry and demolish Catholicism, as represented by the weapon in his bloody hands, and as symbolised in the stabbing of the Papal Tiara.

Paul finally relented and resigned himself to following the Masonic programme for the rest of his pontificate. He then informed the Lodge.

A second painting was commissioned and the Pope was now represented with a “more humble” countenance. The pillars of Masonry were emphasised, representing Paul’s triumph of “reason” over “superstition”. Bishop Cleven was on hand to remind Paul that someone else “girded him and led him where he does not want to go.” (As if he needed the reminder)

A humbled Paul then acknowledged that his “acts of reflection” led him to make the right decision. To prevent a relapse, the Frings-led Lodge commissioned seven prints of the portrait – one for each day of the week.

Paul later had a crisis of conscience (as did Frings). He was forced to confront the implications of his progressive reforms as the Church continued to implode and he grieved that no one anywhere on the Catholic spectrum respected him.

When he tried to impose his papal authority, the Lodge reacted swiftly: a staged attempt was made on his life when he visited the Philippines in 1975. Macchi and Marcinkus “saved his life,” and Paul was again beholden to the Masonic forces that elected him.

Paul wavered again, trying to warn Catholics of the Pandora’s Box that had been unleashed by the Council. His furious minders began to lose their patience. It was time for a showdown.

When Paul again publicly held his ground on the Church’s approach to sexuality morality, it was the last straw for the Ecclesiastical Masons. In 1976, a campaign was orchestrated to suggest that the Pope had a very dark secret: that he was a homosexual. Paul was crushed and defeated; he never issued another encyclical and openly expressed his regret for the direction taken by the Council, never admitting his part, overwhelmed as he was by the pressure that had been brought to bear on him.

No wonder Paul whispered to his biographers, “You will crucify me.”

Just to complete the flight of fantasy, on the left is a diagram commonly used in Gnostic Judaism, or Kabbalah.

It is interesting to note how many points line up with Paul’s “portraits.”

SOURCES:

Hieronymopolis.wordpress.com

Novus Ordo Watch

wilfried-hansmann.de

Ernst Guenter Hansing