Freemasonry has been denounced by numerous popes, beginning with Pope Clement XII in 1738, on the grounds that it promotes religious indifferentism.
But after the Second Vatican Council, many Catholics around the world suddenly became confused about whether it was permissible for Catholics to become Masons.
In fact, there was a seven-year stretch in the 1970s when the English-speaking Catholic world was taught by its bishops that, although it was not encouraged, it was in fact permitted to become a Mason, as long as certain conditions were met.
Then, at the end of those seven years, these Catholics were suddenly informed that joining the Masons was actually still forbidden under pain of excommunication – and always had been.
That period in history is all but forgotten today. But a survey of Catholic newspapers from the time period offers a glimpse into the confusion that surrounded the subject of Masonry in the American Catholic world 50 years ago.
Changes anticipated: 1971-1974
While work was underway on the revised Code of Canon Law in Rome in the early 1970s, it became clear that there was widespread anticipation that the Church would soon change her teaching on Catholic participation in Freemasonry.
In August 1971, National Catholic News Service – the news service of the U.S. bishops – issued a lengthy report which predicted that the Church would soon modify her teaching on the matter.
Headlined, “Catholic-Masonic Relations Enter Friendly New Era,” the report included commentary from leading experts in Rome, including Fr. Jean Beyer, SJ – Dean of Faculty of Canon Law at the Gregorian University in Rome and a consultor to the Vatican Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law. The syndicated story ran in official diocesan newspapers throughout the nation.
Two years later, in June 1973, National Catholic News Service again reported that Church officials were expecting and planning for a change in Church teaching.
The article, headlined “Church ban on Freemasonry expected to be relaxed,” revealed that the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales had sent letters to all priests in their country, informing them that some “relaxation” in the ban on Freemasonry was expected soon.
According to the letter from the English hierarchy, “it seems probable that each national bishops’ conference will be left to decide whether Masons will have to resign membership in being received into the Church, and also whether requests from laymen [to] join the Masons may be granted.”
This news was widely printed in official diocesan newspapers throughout the country and continued to be discussed in newspapers and clerical journals between the summer of 1973 and spring 1974.
The growing consensus — as promoted by the U.S. bishops’ news service — was that the old prohibition would soon be changed.
this article, by david l gray, is republished from one peter 5. While i don’t agree with the author’s conclusion (as reflected in my title), it does contain some relevant information for followers of ecclesiastical freemasonry.
There was such a dramatic change in the social and theological dispositions towards Freemasonry amongst many European, Argentinian, and North American Catholics immediately following the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council in 1965, that, at minimum, should have provoked a reasonable and rational concern amongst the faithful.
Some have argued that this divergence from the traditional teaching about Freemasonry was just the fruit of an infiltration of Freemasons that began with the Carbonari’s 1859 Alta Vendita plot. However, this analysis is too simplistic.
The Carbonari was an Italian political sect, whose membership was not exclusively composed of Freemasons. It was not a Masonic sect (i.e., beholden as an affiliate or appendant to the Grand Lodge). The fact the Catholic Church has never treated the Carbonari as a Masonic sect, but as a distinct secret society that plots against the Church, is affirmed by Pope Pius VII in his 1821 Ecclesiam a Jesu, and by Pope Leo XIII in his 1826 Quo Gaviora.
This is not the say that there have not been initiated Freemasons throughout the clergy, for that has certainly been true in the past and in the present. Rather, it is to say we can do better in analyzing and verifying those movements inside the Catholic Church which made it more friendly with Freemasons and more sympathetic toward some sects of Freemasonry. This first article will discuss some of the Masonic influences before Vatican II, stretching back some three hundred years. In the next article we will treat more specifically the claim of some to place the blame of infiltration solely on the plot of the Alta Vendita.
Vatican II Red Flags
Truly, smoke signals should have gone up in 1967 when the Scandinavian Bishop’s Conference (consisting of the countries of Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland), following a four-year study into Freemasonry in their dioceses, decided to permit Catholics in their dioceses to retain their Masonic membership, “but only with the specific permission of that person’s bishop.” This deference to the local ordinary on a matter, heretofore, considered to be immutable, was the Scandinavian’s Bishops interpretation of Paul VI’s Apostolic Letter Moto Proprio, De Episcoporum Muneribus, which, itself is an interpretative reading of para. 27 of Lumen Gentium, gave bishops more authority to be the final arbiters of Canon Law.
Truly, alarm bells should have gone off on March 16, 1968, The Tablet (a progressive Catholic international weekly review published in London) reported in their ‘The Church in the World’ news and noted section:
Go-ahead for Catholic Masons: Vatican sources have recently been quoted as saying that Catholics are now free to join the Masons in the United States, Britain and most other countries of the world. However, the European Grand Orient Lodge of Masons, established primarily in Italy and France, is still considered anti-Catholic or, at least, atheistic.
Later that year, The Tablet would also take an Editorial stance in opposition to Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae vitae.
Truly, visible panic should have ensued on July 19, 1974, when Cardinal Franjo Seper, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wrote a letter, which was supposedly intended to be private correspondence, to Cardinal John Krol, the Archbishop of Philadelphia at the time, supporting the Scandinavian interpretation of De Episcoporum Muneribus concerning Canon Law No. 2335 (prohibiting membership into societies that plot against the Catholic Church), stating,
Many Bishops have asked this Sacred Congregation about the extent and interpretation of Canon 2335 of the Code of Canon Law which prohibits Catholics, under pain of excommunication, to join masonic associations, or similar associations… Taking particular cases into consideration, it is essential to remember that the penal law has to be interpreted in a restrictive sense. For this reason, one can certainly point out, and follow, the opinion of those writers who maintain that Canon 2335 affects only those Catholics who are members of associations which indeed conspire against the Church.
It was almost hilarious that men who were plotting against the Catholic Church themselves were then putting themselves in a position to tell us which sects of Freemasons were not plotting against the Catholic Church. But this was something that went back centuries.
Pre-Vatican II Efforts to Normalize Freemasonry
This scheme to differentiate the Anglo-sects of Freemasonry (those whose charters and warrants originate from the Mother Grand Lodges of England, Ireland, and Scotland) from the Continental-sects of Freemasonry (those whose constitutions and rites are based upon the Grand Orient Lodges of France and Italy) began in 1738, when on the eve of Pope Clement XII issuance of his Apostolic Constitution In Eminenti apostolatus specula (The High Watch) on April 28, 1738. This Pontiff in fact had to endure the efforts of his nephew, Neri Maria Cardinal Corsini, who attempted to prevail upon him that Freemasonry in England was merely an “innocent mirth.”
Indeed, perhaps Cardinal Neri revealed himself as a Freemason with his choice of those descriptive words, which is, curiously, are the exact instruction given to Freemasons in Article VI of the 1723 Constitution of the Grand Lodge of England (so-called Anderson’s Constitution) concerning how Freemasons ought to behave amongst each other after the official meeting of the lodge has concluded and the brethren are not, yet, gone; “You may enjoy yourself with innocent Mirth . . .”
Pius IX clearly taught in this 1873 Etsi Multa that Church teaching does not distinguish between sects of Freemasonry; “Teach them that these decrees refer not only to Masonic groups in Europe, but also those in America and in other regions of the world.” Nevertheless, Father John E. Burke of the Catholic Board of Negro Mission, reported to the United States Bishops the fact that one of the barriers in place that was preventing more Black Americans from becoming Catholic was that too many of them belonged to forbidden secret societies like the Freemasons. Therefore, he argued, permission should be obtained from the Holy See to allow prospective Black American converts to retain their membership in such societies for the sake of the financial benefits. Burke’s errant finding was that Black secret societies did not present the same threat to Catholics that the White societies did.
The idea of their being a socially acceptable and theologically compatible version of Freemasonry is a myth. All sects of Freemasonry have always been prohibited because they all hold fast to the dogma of indifferentism and the belief that Freemasonry is man’s highest good (see my prior analysis here and here). Yet, to this day, this insane myth, first uttered by Cardinal Neri to Pope Clement XII, continues to be spread throughout the Catholic Church and made amazing strides in the neo-heterodox-praxis of the Catholic faith thanks to the liberal interpretation of para. 27 of Lumen Gentium that birthed De Episcoporum Muneribus in the wake of Vatican II.
The 72nd National Liturgical Week is currently underway in Italy with the theme “Ministries at the Service of a Synodal Church.”
As you can see, the switch from the “Catholic Church” to the “Synodal Church” is almost complete now, with “synodality” being tossed freely about at every Catholic committee meeting, conference and talkfest.
“Synodality” and its converse – the death of Tradition – is almost a fait accompli. Of course, being of Divine origin, Tradition can never really die, but it certainly can languish in a dungeon while the ape of the Church ploughs on with its programme.
Cardinal Parolin is there at the conference, drawing attention to the great transformation currently underway. He reminds us that these nouveau ministries hold “particular significance for the Church in the present historical moment.” Well, of course they do. These Synodal Ministries will ensure the extermination of the Latin Mass by making the new generation of lukewarm Catholics complicit in the destruction.
Speaking on behalf of the Pope, Cardinal Parolin quoted the pontiff and his desire that the legion of Made-Up Ministers become “experts in the art of encounter,” something with disconcerting undertones in these days of gay-cruising priests, semi-naked liturgical dancers, and episcopal beach houses.
But he probably just means that the Apostles of the Church of Nice will be trained (at the pew-sitter’s expense) to speak nicely about nice topics, referencing the nicest parts of Scripture and generally promulgating the virtue of niceness.
Except when dealing with Trads. Because they don’t count.
Thankfully, the Pope can rest his novel schemes on the solid basis of a predecessor. Who says Francis only relies on his own ideas? What balderdash.
Francis has reached back through the mists of time to draw on the perennial wisdom of the magisterium as it has existed for ……. the last fifty years …… to remind us of the reforms of Paul VI and to dreamily cast his vision for “the renewal of the Church in an increasingly “communal” and less clerical direction.”
What a relief for those billions of victims of heterodox teaching clericalism. After all, clericalism really is the main problem facing the Church today.
Parolin, ever the dutiful son of the Church, reminds the more skeptical among us that the universal priesthood must not be confused with the ministerial priesthood.
Whew. Thanks for that, Your Excellency. I’m sure placing those two terms in the same sentence and in the context of expansion of ministries for the laity definitely won’t produce that effect.
Francis serves up another heresy sandwich with Desiderio Desideravi.
The documents of Vatican II are often likened to a cake to which a teaspoon of poison has been added, rendering the whole thing unfit to eat. Our present Pope has taken that to a new level with his regular offerings of heresy sandwich: two wholesome slices of brown bread (sound doctrine) with a thick layer of heresy sandwiched between them.
His Apostolic letter, Desiderio Desideravi, is a prime example of this. With its calls for more reverent celebration of the Mass, and for congregants to be better educated about the nature of the Mass, most of its content is as solid as the homemade loaves baked by grandma on her woodstove.
Then we hear from Giovanni Zaccaria, professor at the Pontifical University of Santa Croce who really knows how to draw attention to that soul-snatching poison found lurking in the sandwich. (“Wait!” I hear you say. “The Pope didn’t say this.” To which my response is: this is how he operates; this is “his style”, as he is so fond of saying. Bergoglio’s “style” is to get a mouthpiece to explain what is really going on in his mind.) Back to Zaccaria:
“The first need is to understand the priestly dimension of the baptized. That all the baptized are priests, they participate in the priesthood, through the common priesthood of the faithful, they participate in the priesthood of Christ. Therefore, in that celebration, they are also protagonists”.
Well, not really.
In the Mass, there is ONE priest, a ordained man who gave up the promise of comfort and family life for the sake of Jesus Christ. But even HE is not the “protagonist” of the Mass: the protagonist in the Mass is Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity, offering His Sacrifice of Himself to the First Person of the Trinity, God the Father, through the action of the Third Person, the Holy Ghost. A priest simply acts in persona Christi.
There is no human protagonist in the Mass.
Of course, the Modernists always make a fuss of this ‘Royal Priesthood” thing, and of course, they have Scripture to back them. up. 1 Peter 2:9 is a favourite reference; a look at the second part of that verse gives a clue as to why this verse is so beloved of the modern Church: “But you are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people: that you may declare his virtues, who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.“
It’s a handy little verse that can easily be co-opted by lodge-attending Modernists. They just LOVE Masonic-sounding Bible references.
Now, some might think that Fr Zaccaria is applying St Peter’s exhortation to the faithful in order to make them more appreciative of their baptismal graces and ultimately more attentive at Mass. However, reading more of his comments makes it quite clear, that this man’s intention – if not that of the original document – is to encourage the “clericalisation of the laity and the laicisation of clerics.”
The laity don’t kneel in Mass because they are a lesser form of priest, the laity (and priest) kneel as a sign of humility before the awe-inspiring sacrifice of Jesus Christ, before the grandeur of the Trinity, before the miracle of Transubstantiation.
We kneel because we deserve hell but also have a chance of avoiding it.
We kneel out of love and reverence – not because we want to be – or are, in some mysterious way – priests.
By the way, this final phrase could be taken to suggest that traditionalists, who are known for doing a lot of kneeling during a Latin Mass, simply do so because that it their personal preference – their “party.”
“When you kneel it is also a sign of the priestly dimension of everything you are doing. The gestures already exist, but they need to be understood, explained better, because if not, they become our party and the Mass is not our party”.
So what at first seems like grandma’s good and wholesome bread may in fact leave the recipient with a rather nasty taste in his mouth – if not a case of indigestion.
If only the reality was as insignificant as the analogy, since a heresy sandwich is something that harms not the body, but the soul.
The Pope’s decision to accept a traditional indigenous feather headdress while in Canada was not really surprising. After all, nothing of this sort can come as a shock after seeing our Pope publicly honour Pachamama back in 2019.
To the mournful melody of indigenous Indian chanting – the meaning of which no one knows – two American Indian men, wearing traditional blue jeans, presented the Pope with the head dress.
As with Australian Aboriginal ceremonies, there are secrets surrounding the meaning of the feather head dress and its bestowal. From what can be gleaned online, this kind of attire is a reward for warriors who, after earning the individual feathers for their acts of bravery and wisdom, have finally gathered enough to have a head dress made. That all sounds very prestigious and honorific, and consistent with the respect shown to a visiting head of state.
However, also gleaned from the online descriptions is the underlying notion that the feathers contain the ‘eagle spirit.’ If a head dress accidentally touches the ground, the Indians believe a special ritual needs to be performed in order to return the ‘eagle spirit’ to the head dress.
The eagle is sacred to the native Americans, because they believe that bird takes their prayers to the Great Spirit. It would be nice to think that this ‘Great Spirit’ is identical with God the Father, and that we all believe in the same God and that everything is peachy because everyone is taking different paths on the same journey and all of that.
However, as the Psalm makes clear, “the gods of the Gentiles are devils”. So in effect, Francis has agreed to take on yet another demon to add to the collection he has been amassing since at least 2017, when he was prayed over by this Indigenous witch. (left)
Reason would suggest that Jorge Bergoglio’s relationship with pagan gods began long before that.
And a couple of others who have not been identified. What a treasure this is: finally we know that evidence of Bugnini’s Masonic membership exists, albeit lying in a dusty vault somewhere under the Vatican.
A priest by the name of Fr Charles Murr has just released a book which documents an investigation into ecclesiastical Freemasonry begun under Pope Paul VI. That’s right, Paul who was by no means a model Pope, had the fortitude to at least start the investigation. But unfortunately, as the books relates, he did not have the stomach to carry through the report’s findings.
Pope John Paul I also read the report but mysteriously died before he could take any action. The report then passed to John Paul II, who simply ignored it. Not very saintly of him, was it?
One wonders about the implications of the hierarchy confronting the fact that the Novus Ordo was created by a Mason. What does that say about the new Mass? What does it say about Traditiones Custodes? (Not what we say – which barely passes muster in polite conversation – but could we one day see a ceremonious tossing of an official Church document into an elegant Italian garbage bin?)
Would we see a very hasty evaporation of the ghastly Spirit of Vatican II as prelate after prelate tries to distance himself from the novelties imposed upon the Church by a Freemason?
No wonder the report has never been released. It would simply create a huge headache for the Church the intensity of which would make the abuse scandals pale into insignificance.
So until the report is opened by some unfortunate prelate, it will gather dust along with the so-called Red Dossier, Benedict XVI’s report into the sexual, moral and financial scandals in the Vatican. Both documents are no doubt mouldering in the archives somewhere near the real Third Secret of Fatima and the first drafts of the McCarrick Report.
But do read Fr Murr’s book, if you have the chance. If nothing else, it is a reminder that there has always been and will always be good men in Rome.
A news article at Gloria TV about Masons involved at the highest levels of the Vatican caught my eye. The report was based on an Italian article which can be found here. I ran the whole thing through Google Translate so hopefully it will be coherent enough to read. The pictures with their captions come from the original article.
I’ll try have a professional translation made of “Gone with the Wind in the Vatican” – that book may provide the evidence needed to prove the claims made below
The publication of the book,Gone with the Wind in the Vatican, in 1999, by Edizioni Kaos, written by a group of personalities, probably ecclesiastical, who collectively signed Themselves The Millennials, unleashed, at the time, a real hornet’s nest in the upper floors of the Catholic Church, as well as in the world of public information. But it was, as we then saw, a storm in a glass of water: in practice, the strategy adopted by the leaders of the Church, with the connivance and complicity of all the major press organs and public and private television (confirming that there is no real competition between them, since they belong to the same owners and take orders from the same centers of occult power: exactly as we see in recent months) was that of or the rubber wall of silence to the terrible revelations contained in that book, and wait for public opinion, overwhelmed and dazed by new news from a hundred other directions, to forget about the scandal with the same speed with which it had been invested.
A strategy that has always worked, because, in the world of so-called information, the rule is that the mind of the public must always be “occupied” by a tumultuous succession of news, true or false, objective or exaggerated, and possibly minimized, without ever being able to form a clear and overall idea of the situation, precisely because it is always committed to “digest” new materials that are constantly pressing, in which truth and falsehood are wisely dosed in such a way that they can no longer distinguish them and lose the very taste for truth and the innate contempt for lies.
This is the strategy adopted today towards Monsignor Carlo Maria Viganò: to ignore him completely, at first; then, subject it to the barrage of criticism and denigration, often in the form of “friendly fire”, that is, the subtle attacks launched by those who, until yesterday, seemed to share its objectives and the need for moral cleanliness; finally silence again, because the globalist power immediately realized that it had made a mistake in talking about him, even if to denigrate and ridicule him, because of the real enemies it must never speak, for any reason. It is the surest way to let the effect that their words and actions exert on the masses be praised: since, for the latter, there really is only what the newspapers and televisions talk about; while what they do not talk about, in practice it is as if it did not exist, even if it were a truck launched at insane speed that is running over the highway, arriving in the forbidden direction of travel.
Monsignor Marinelli was not the author, but one of the authors of the book-revelation, as he himself admitted during some interviews, calling himself simply “a spokesman” for the group. He had become aware of a series of scandals in the Vatican linked both to the widespread practice of homosexuality, to the careerism and profiteering of many high figures of the Roman Curia, and, finally, to the practice of occult rites linked to Freemasonry and even black masses, a direct expression of Satanism; and he was shocked.
For a long time he had wondered what his duty was, whether to speak or be silent, however for the love of the Church; he had also counseled with the well-known exorcist Don Gabriele Amorth, who had encouraged him in the second direction. And so the book Gone with the Wind in the Vatican was born, originated, whatever one may say, not by speculative intent, but, on the contrary, by the sincere desire to see a brake and a remedy put in place to a moral drift that for years had been proceeding without obstacles in the upper echelons of the Church. Hope that went frustrated: the book was promptly made to disappear from bookstores, because all the 100,000 copies sold, or most of them, were purchased by the Vatican, which eliminated them; and the press dealt with it very little, so that the resonance was modest, if at all.
The bulk of public opinion did not know about it; no debate was ignited; the scandalous careers of the prelates in the smell of perversion, business and Freemasonry, did not suffer substantial obstacles, at most some promotions were frozen, on a prudential basis. But in short, the lid of the nauseating pot was not lifted, and no one rolled up their sleeves to purify the miasmas that were hanging the atmosphere of the Bride of Christ.
Those who had to answer uncomfortable questions did not answer; and those who had reason to scratch their mange, as father Dante would say, were spared a similar, public humiliation. A great opportunity for reflection and rethinking was wasted; and the malpractice now consolidated, tolerated or perhaps even accepted by Paul VI and then by Giovani Paolo II, who cared more about carrying out his anti-communist plots directed against the Soviet Union than ascertaining the origin of the money destined for this (money anticipated by Masonic and mafia financiers such as Calvi, Sindona and Ortolani), continued as before and worse than before.
By now a real Masonic dome had been consolidated inside the Vatican (there are those who speak of four different lodges that dominate and even compete with each other), in which, scandal in scandal, flourished and still flourishes, so to speak, a real gay lobby, cemented and strengthened by the sad solidarity of the humorous type that binds, its members, united by the same vice and well determined to continue to practice it with impunity, even in the most brazen forms, but not to let anything leak outside, at the cost of passing over corpses, and not only in a figurative sense (those of Albino Luciani, Emanuela Orlandi and the Vatican gendarmes Estermann and Tornay, for example).
Against Monsignor Marinelli, who was the head of the office of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, and therefore had known well, and from within, the “dome” of power of the Curia, a criminal proceeding had been opened, on charges of defamation and disclosure of state secrets, but the accused had decided not to appear at the hearings at the Vatican Chancellery building. Shortly afterwards he died, towards the end of October 2000, before the trial reached a formal conviction and just one year after the publication of the “incriminated” book: a rather timely death, which allowed the Vatican, for the umpteenth time, to sweep the dirt under the carpet and go on as if nothing had happened, deaf and insensitive to any moral call or warning.
In any case, the most scandalous, and most disturbing, aspect of the revelations contained in the book was the one that was least talked about, namely the massive and widespread infiltration of Masonic lodges within the Church and especially in the Roman Curia. And even in this case it was certainly no coincidence that the few articles that appeared in the press in relation to the Millennials have overlooked, or treated only in passing, this topic: in fact, if even a part of the revelations contained in it were true (and this was also the opinion of Father Amorth: not everything was true, but most of them did), this would have made indispensable a profound reflection on the direction that the post-conciliar Church had taken, in the sense of shortening the distances from the Masonic order and to build a bridge, more than suspicious, towards it (a bridge that would culminate in theDear Masonic Brothers of Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, which appeared in Il Sole 24 Ore in February 2016.
It would have been necessary to reflect on a whole series of “openings”, or ostrich policies, starting with the laws on divorce and abortion, which certainly had been promoted by the lodges, but which were not reconciled at all with the true Magisterium of the Church, and are not reconciled even today, in spite of what all the cardinals of the Curia and all the modernist theologians who today go crazy with the greatest ease can say, supported by a wicked pontificate that, for eight years now, speaks only of breaking down walls and building bridges, as if pervaded by a frantic spirit of self-destruction.
Shortly after the publication of the book Gone with the Wind in the Vatican, it was the journalist Luigi Baldo, who at the time collaborated with Giorgio Bongiovanni’s magazine, Terzo Millennio, who wanted to publish an interview with Monsignor Marinelli. The reader should forget, or put in brackets, the more than dubious figure of Bongiovanni, and not be blocked by a legitimate preconception towards him; but keep in mind that, sometimes, the truth shines through even where one would least expect to find it, precisely because, when the most forbidden conformism and systematic control of information apply, it happens that some flash of truth appears precisely in the newspapers or on television networks that, although questionable in many respects, nevertheless, at that particular moment, and perhaps for reasons all of them, they are determined to put a spanner in the works to the consolidated system of totalitarian consensus, so they offer some space for true information where all the others have been closed or duly tamed.
And here is the part of the interview that concerns the theme of Freemasonry within the Church (from: Lorenzo Baldo, Interview with Monsignor Marinelli, on Terzo Millennio, S. Elpidio a Mare (AP), n. 3 of Sept. 1999, pp. 74-75):
Q: Let’s get to the problem of Freemasonry…
A. Padre Pio, four years before the prophecy of Fatima, wrote to his spiritual father about a revelation that the Lord had made to him, namely that he saw many ecclesiastics, many prelates enrolled in Freemasonry.
Q. So what should be done to expel Freemasonry from the Church?
A. As you know Freemasonry continues to be a secret sect that reveals the first two or three degrees, no one knows for sure the other higher degrees, no one knows them. I think that in order to expel Freemasonry, the rooting of Freemasonry within the Church, it is necessary to have seminarians and students of pontifical Catholic universities study a subject on Freemasonry. Until now, seminarians were instructed on all questions of human knowledge, without knowing a word about how Freemasonry manages to infiltrate the Church. no one knows, yet a seminarian who tomorrow will become a priest, can meet with any Freemason in his parish, without knowing how to behave. It is evident that no one wants to “fight” something without knowing it first. If Freemasonry within the Church is to be fought, it must be known first and to know it must be studied. Freemasonry cares, in the same way as the devil, to make believe that “it does not exist”. In all the articles that appeared in the newspapers on the book of the Millennials, there is barely any mention of Freemasonry, one or at most two questions, when instead this is precisely the “purulent plague”…
Q. What is the practice for entry into Freemasonry?
A. In the books it is clearly written. In Freemasonry one does not enter by “question”, but by “invitation”; at the limit you can show yourself by those in charge, as a valid person, intelligent, at most… But it is the Superior Council of Freemasonry that judges the suitability or not for a “new entry” and when the response is positive one is “invited to enter the Masonic Order”.
“They” first study the characters to be inserted and when everyone agrees, with a secret vote, we proceed to the invitation of that person… to make a cleric “enter” they make him certain promises that are then in fact kept, such as that of becoming a bishop, nuncio, secretary of a cardinal, etc., then at a certain point he is reminded of the reason why he had this type of facilitation and if he does not intend to continue all negotiations are interrupted… and since “they” abound “careerist” people, greedy for success, it is very difficult for someone to back down, since he has now entered a “game” too big…
In the last century there were many priests who, at the end of their lives, dissociated themselves from Freemasonry by converting, but now they are not. Now we tend to do something else, the opposite, let’s take the example of the Jesuit Father Caprile and others, who said; that Freemasonry is not really against God and against the Church and that one can very well to be Catholics and Freemasons at the same time.
Since there is no longer “excommunication”, the Catholic-Mason can go to communion and approach the high sacraments… Here is the scam! Whereas before you were excommunicated, now the deception takes place without problems… and remember what Paul VI said: the smoke of Satan entered the temple of God… it has the key to understanding.
What “smoke” more dark, oppressive than that of Freemasonry? Here we speak of spiritual smoke. And if we take note that it is the pontiff himself of that time who makes such statements. the issue increases in importance.
A month ago the news came out, that in London the Masonic Order has established a chair in the faculty precisely on Freemasonry, so I wonder, if “they” do it because we can not do it too, telling the truth about how they were born and what they do?
When a professor has to teach a subject, obviously he must study it first, document himself, in this way he would delve into the most total fund of Freemasonry discovering new implications. All this is very worrying… While we are still anxious about how the new millennium will open, let us leave out this “piece” that is literally flooding humanity and the Church.
Q. How much more is not known about this link with Freemasonry?
A. The things you don’t know are 95%… Regarding this matter I read a book of 500 pages and it is something to make the skin cringe… the UN is a conclusion of the purpose of Freemasonry of 1717, NATO is a conclusion of what was proclaimed, the same dollar bears exposed the pyramid, which is the coat of arms of Freemasonry and many other things… such as for UNESCO and organizations that want to eliminate the power of States and “regionalize” them, as happened in the Balkans, they want to regionalize it in order to better dominate them.
It is time to move towards a universal government, a world government in which there are the most important religions, where it is accepted that the “universal architect” is this supreme being who can be called Christ, Allah, Jehovah. The important thing is to get to the global government of the world…
Q. The links between the Church and economic speculation…
A. It is enough to remember the scandals of the IOR linked to Freemasonry, also broadcast on television in front of millions of viewers.
Q. How is the scandal of pedophile priests possible, or of ecclesiastical homosexuality linked to “careerism”?
A. I do not give myself a reason, I was very impressed by the Pope’s forgiveness to the victims of these sexual abuses, in the book, the question is just raised, but it undoubtedly remains a terrible plague. The use of homosexuality as a form of careerism has been one of the most frequent practices and there are clear examples in the book.
Q. What about mafia infiltrations inside the Vatican?
A. I am not aware of it.
A. For what reasons, even within the Church, has there been a real persecution of Padre Pio?
A. Padre Pio has always been a “target”, as Simeon said to the Lord, a point of reference and contestation. even from the inside..
What about the words of Monsignor Marinelli? How to judge them, in the light of all that has happened in the last twenty-two years, and that he could not have imagined, as probably almost none of us? Once again, it is clear that the policy of opening up to all and of dialoguing with all, inaugurated by the self-styled “good pope” with the Second Vatican Council, has produced, and continues to produce, disastrous fruits, to say the least.
Since then it has been said, and made to believe by the faithful, that the Church no longer has enemies, and therefore, implicitly or explicitly, that she must disarm, lower her guard and place herself in an attitude of understanding, appreciation and dialogue also with those parts of society that have always opposed and strenuously fought her. At the heart of them is Freemasonry whose summit, whatever the low-ranking affiliates are told, is the destruction of Catholicism and the cancellation of Christ’s redemptive work, to establish a New World Order, dominated by some powerful men who want to be worshiped as gods, or almost.
And already now they have reached a good point in their program: in the meantime, in fact, they have managed, for the second Christmas in a row, to pass on the idea that man is not saved by the Incarnation of Christ, but by the inoculation of the “sacred” vaccine (which is not a vaccine at all, but an experimental gene serum). Their general programme, therefore, has already come a long way on the road to realization.
There is still little left, and then they will throw off the mask altogether: and they will show themselves for what they are and have always been: sworn enemies of Christ and his holy Name, and therefore satanic and implacable enemies of the good, of the true and of the beautiful.
My previous article looked at a few secularists who have taken it upon themselves to create a new code of ethics for mankind, meant to replace the Ten Commandments given to Moses on Mount Sinai more than three thousand years ago. It also mentioned one of the current Pontiff’s flights into fantasy when he rewrote the Commandments for a group of adoring fans in Rome.
The Ten Commandments, also known as the Decalogue, were of course, intended by God to be binding for all time. They are engraved into our hearts and are the guide by which we are meant to “know, love and serve God in this life” in order to one day be happy with Him in heaven.
While “Decalogue” literally means “ten words” – without any reference to their divine origin – the dictionary meaning always specifies The Ten Commandments as recorded in the book of Exodus. No dictionary I consulted listed any meaning other than that used by Christians. Thus, the name doesn’t apply to any old list of ten principles.
So it was with some surprise that I came across yet another novel “Decalogue” created with input from modern-day Pope: none other than John Paul II, who co-authored a “Decalogue of Assisi for Peace” in 2002. (This link will take you to the Vatican website, so you know it’s legit.)
Seeing the word “Assisi” always raises a red flag for traditionally-minded Catholics. That series of meetings with leaders from other faiths, held first by JPII then Benedict, was notorious for its open-slather ecumania and for the utter disdain shown by the reigning pope for his distinguished predecessors who warned of the dangers inherent in such an approach.
There were many incidents during the Assisi meetings that caused great scandal among believers, but perhaps nothing was worse than seeing a statue of Buddha being placed atop the tabernacle in St Peter Church at Assisi. (Images courtesy TFP except where otherwise cited.)
The Assisi “Decalogue”, like the secular versions already mentioned on this site, focuses on achieving peace on earth. However, as Christians we know that an earthly Utopia is impossible without the entire world acknowledging the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ as Lord and King. In JPII’s ecumenical “decalogue”, references to Jesus Christ are not just thin on the ground, they are entirely absent.
So while the sentiments sound nice, (what sane person doesn’t want peace on earth, for crying out loud?) the entire project was obviously a complete waste of time. How is that “culture of dialogue” working out for you, Vatican II?
Perhaps the entire Modernist project will be abandoned when our prelates realise that the directives laid down by God are the best ones: the best for our souls and the best for the world.
But then, that assumes that the men who are driving the demolition of the Church are acting in good faith. And, given the Church’s widespread capitulation to the State, the attacks on the traditional liturgy, and a Pachamama-worshipping Pontiff, that is something one very much doubts.
Remember the Two Minutes Hate from Orwell’s 1984? It was a regular, designated time allotted to giving the unfortunate inhabitants of Oceania an outlet for their pent-up frustrations so that their resentment was never aimed at the real abuser: their tyrannical leader, Big Brother.
Well, this offering from the Archdiocese of Brisbane might not count as hate, per se, but one has to admit that their “Blooper” video shows nothing but contempt and disrespect for the Sacred Liturgy and makes one wonder if comedy is being used to disguise the priests’ personal resentment toward their own, holy vocation.
Under the watchful eye of the papolatrous Mark Coleridge, who isn’t exactly known for his love of doctrine or tradition, the Archdiocese has sunk to a new low with the release of the two-minute video showing bloopers and gaffs made by priests during their online homilies. The cringeworthy video, which – even more embarrassingly has become an annual offering – features priests laughing, lisping and mocking the serious business of forming their flocks.
What some might consider a light-hearted wrap-up to a tumultuous year, in reality exemplifies the disdain harboured by much of the clergy towards tradition as well as the modern ecclesial obsession on celebrity, a phenomenon which disastrously runs contrary to the virtue of humility.
These modernists priests seem to think it’s “all about them.” THEIR style, THEIR humour, THEIR performance. There’s no doubt that people make mistakes, sometimes humorous ones, when speaking publicly and privately, but that’s no reason to make a joke out of a sacred liturgical action.
A harmless joke is when an 8-year-old draws a picture of Pontius Pilate flying a plane, but it is not harmless or a joke when a grown man dressed in priestly garb plays up to the camera and is then showcased by the diocesan media team.
The video can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/aNyVWRgrkVw A couple of screengrabs are shown below, but I do recommend watching it with the sound up for the whole experience. The captions are from the video – not added by yours truly.
It might be all “Lights! Camera! Action!” when it comes to entertaining the masses that are being “accompanied” to hell, but each of these men will have to account for his “darkness and inaction” at the hour of his death.
Meanwhile, all those actual priests – those men who take their vocations seriously – don’t have time for this kind of nonsense. They’re far too busy hearing confessions for hours each week, or dropping everything to administer the Last Rites to a dying parishioner, or answering unjust admonitions from their Ordinaries or carefully crafting a solid sermon based on the writings of the saints and the Fathers of the Church.