It was a little over seven years ago that a fully traditional priest, one who has great zeal for souls, said the following to me before I gave a lecture in his parish, “You have used the phrase Judeo-Masonry in your writing. You will not do so here.”
This admonition came just three months after the Christophobic Southern Poverty Law Center had issued its so-called “Dirty Dozen” list of “radical” traditional Catholic organizations that were said to be guilty of propagating “hate” (see Hating Without Distinction, Chopped Liver No More, To Advocate Christ The King, Nothing Else and Chopped Liver No More Update). The issuance of the list had a chilling effect in some fully traditional circles as any discussion of Talmudic influence in the twin, interrelated anti-Incarnational currents of Modernity in the world and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism was deemed as “unacceptable” or “inflammatory.” Pure honesty, however, requires one to speak the truth, yes, even when doing so will “offend” those who are hellbent on making war upon Christ the King and upon those who dare to criticize them publicly for doing so.
While it is true, as Father Edward Cahill, S.J., pointed out in his series on Freemasonry in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record eighty-five years ago now, that not all those who adhere to Judaism are responsible for this warfare against the true teachings of the Catholic Church or support the prevailing evils of the day, we must remember that unbelief in the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is a sin. Those who persist in unbelief in the Catholic Faith must be reminded that their own false beliefs, whether they be religious or philosophical or both, cannot save their souls or serve as any kind of foundation for true social order within countries or peace among them.
Saint Thomas Aquinas taught us in his Summa Theologica that unbelievers do not merit anything before God for their good works and thus cannot please Him:
Objection 1. It would seem that each act of an unbeliever is a sin. Because a gloss on Romans 14:23, “All that is not of faith is sin,” says: “The whole life of unbelievers is a sin.” Now the life of unbelievers consists of their actions. Therefore every action of an unbeliever is a sin.
Objection 2. Further, faith directs the intention. Now there can be no good save what comes from a right intention. Therefore, among unbelievers, no action can be good.
Objection 3. Further, when that which precedes is corrupted, that which follows is corrupted also. Now an act of faith precedes the acts of all the virtues. Therefore, since there is no act of faith in unbelievers, they can do no good work, but sin in every action of theirs.
On the contrary, It is said of Cornelius, while yet an unbeliever (Acts 10:4-31), that his alms were acceptable to God. Therefore not every action of an unbeliever is a sin, but some of his actions are good.
I answer that, As stated above (I-II, 85, 2,4) mortal sin takes away sanctifying grace, but does not wholly corrupt the good of nature. Since therefore, unbelief is a mortal sin, unbelievers are without grace indeed, yet some good of nature remains in them. Consequently it is evident that unbelievers cannot do those good works which proceed from grace, viz. meritorious works; yet they can, to a certain extent, do those good works for which the good of nature suffices.
Hence it does not follow that they sin in everything they do; but whenever they do anything out of their unbelief, then they sin. For even as one who has the faith, can commit an actual sin, venial or even mortal, which he does not refer to the end of faith, so too, an unbeliever can do a good deed in a matter which he does not refer to the end of his unbelief.
Reply to Objection 1. The words quoted must be taken to mean either that the life of unbelievers cannot be sinless, since without faith no sin is taken away, or that whatever they do out of unbelief, is a sin. Hence the same authority adds: “Because every one that lives or acts according to his unbelief, sins grievously.”
Reply to Objection 2. Faith directs the intention with regard to the supernatural last end: but even the light of natural reason can direct the intention in respect of a connatural good.
Reply to Objection 3. Unbelief does not so wholly destroy natural reason in unbelievers, but that some knowledge of the truth remains in them, whereby they are able to do deeds that are generically good. With regard, however, to Cornelius, it is to be observed that he was not an unbeliever, else his works would not have been acceptable to God, whom none can please without faith. Now he had implicit faith, as the truth of the Gospel was not yet made manifest: hence Peter was sent to him to give him fuller instruction in the faith. (Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Question 10, Article 4.)
Judeo-Masonry is the celebration of agnosticism and religious indifferentism as the foundation for personal happiness and social order, something that Pope Leo XIII noted very clearly in Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884:
But the naturalists go much further; for, having, in the highest things, entered upon a wholly erroneous course, they are carried headlong to extremes, either by reason of the weakness of human nature, or because God inflicts upon them the just punishment of their pride. Hence it happens that they no longer consider as certain and permanent those things which are fully understood by the natural light of reason, such as certainly are — the existence of God, the immaterial nature of the human soul, and its immortality. The sect of the Freemasons, by a similar course of error, is exposed to these same dangers; for, although in a general way they may profess the existence of God, they themselves are witnesses that they do not all maintain this truth with the full assent of the mind or with a firm conviction. Neither do they conceal that this question about God is the greatest source and cause of discords among them; in fact, it is certain that a considerable contention about this same subject has existed among them very lately. But, indeed, the sect allows great liberty to its votaries, so that to each side is given the right to defend its own opinion, either that there is a God, or that there is none; and those who obstinately contend that there is no God are as easily initiated as those who contend that God exists, though, like the pantheists, they have false notions concerning Him: all which is nothing else than taking away the reality, while retaining some absurd representation of the divine nature.
When this greatest fundamental truth has been overturned or weakened, it follows that those truths, also, which are known by the teaching of nature must begin to fall — namely, that all things were made by the free will of God the Creator; that the world is governed by Providence; that souls do not die; that to this life of men upon the earth there will succeed another and an everlasting life.
When these truths are done away with, which are as the principles of nature and important for knowledge and for practical use, it is easy to see what will become of both public and private morality. We say nothing of those more heavenly virtues, which no one can exercise or even acquire without a special gift and grace of God; of which necessarily no trace can be found in those who reject as unknown the redemption of mankind, the grace of God, the sacraments, and the happiness to be obtained in heaven. We speak now of the duties which have their origin in natural probity. That God is the Creator of the world and its provident Ruler; that the eternal law commands the natural order to be maintained, and forbids that it be disturbed; that the last end of men is a destiny far above human things and beyond this sojourning upon the earth: these are the sources and these the principles of all justice and morality.
If these be taken away, as the naturalists and Freemasons desire, there will immediately be no knowledge as to what constitutes justice and injustice, or upon what principle morality is founded. And, in truth, the teaching of morality which alone finds favor with the sect of Freemasons, and in which they contend that youth should be instructed, is that which they call “civil,” and “independent,” and “free,” namely, that which does not contain any religious belief. But, how insufficient such teaching is, how wanting in soundness, and how easily moved by every impulse of passion, is sufficiently proved by its sad fruits, which have already begun to appear. For, wherever, by removing Christian education, this teaching has begun more completely to rule, there goodness and integrity of morals have begun quickly to perish, monstrous and shameful opinions have grown up, and the audacity of evil deeds has risen to a high degree. All this is commonly complained of and deplored; and not a few of those who by no means wish to do so are compelled by abundant evidence to give not infrequently the same testimony. (Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884.)
Father Edward Cahill made the same point in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record in those series of articles that was published later as Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement:
We have already referred to Rationalism and Hermeticism (including Theosophy, Christian Scientism, Spiritism, etc.) as characteristic of the Masonic religion and philosophy, These, which are put forward as a substitute for real religion, are fast becoming more and more widespread in England and throughout the English-speaking world. They are the most powerful dissolvents of whatever elements of true Christianity are being attempted. This element is perhaps the most deadly and dangerous aspect of the whole Masonic movement; for it cuts deeper than anything into Christian life, whose very foundation it attacks.
The immediate aim of the practical policy of Freemasonry is to make its naturalistic principles effective in the lives of the people; and first of all to enforce them in every detail of public life. Hence its political and social programme includes:
(1) The banishment of religion from all departments of government, and from all public institutions; and as a mark of the triumph of this policy, the removal of the Crucifix and all religious emblems from the legislative assemblies, the courts of justice, the public hospitals, the schools and university colleges, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 156-157.)
It is very telling that the conciliar revolutionaries have applauded these “developments” as most of their own colleges and universities have divested themselves of official control of what is purported to be the Catholic Church and have removed the Crucifix and other religious emblems from most of their classrooms. Formerly Catholic hospitals have done the same. Indeed, many of them, participating fully in the medical industry’s manufactured, money-making myth of “brain death” (see ObamaDeathCare), have merged with secular corporations. And most Catholics in public life are fully supportive of various evils under cover of the civil law, and none of them is reprobated by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who, quite instead, praises those of them that he meets as “servants of the poor.”
To return to Father Cahill’s enumeration of the Judeo-Masonic program:
(2) The secularization of marriage.
(3) The establishment of a State system of so-called education which, at least in its primary stages, will be obligatory and conducted by the laity.
(4) Complete freedom of worship (at least for all except the true one.) (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 157.)
Absent the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His Catholic Church, men and their nations must fall into the abyss. Those who think that the perversity represented by so-called “gay marriage” has brought us to rock bottom are quite mistaken. Polygamy and “marriage” to children are the next frontiers in the path of “civil freedom” according to the logic of Judeo-Masonry. Total debauchery thus must be enshrined under cover of the civil law and promoted and celebrated throughout what passes for “popular culture.” (See Irreversible By Means Merely Human and Common Core: From Luther To Mann To Bismarck To Obama.)
As has been noted so many times on this site, public schooling has been in the control of Freemasonry from its very inception, and it is designed to eradicate all adherence to the true Faith. (See Inside the Prison Walls.)
What more can be said about “freedom of worship” that has not been said many times before on this site other than to note that Jorge and Pals, including his retired predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believe this heresy to be the “foundation of peace”?
To the final two points of the Judeo-Masonic program as outlined by Father Edward Cahill:
(5) Unrestrained liberty of the Press even in the propagation of irreligious doctrines and of principles subversive of morality; similar freedom for the stage, the cinema, and all manner of public activities, even when injurious to the public interest, such as the operation of the betting and gambling agencies, the drink traffic, etc.
(6) The elimination of all distinction between the sexes in education and in all departments of public life and the promotion or encouragement of radical feminism.
The same programme usually includes or favours a (so-called) Democratic or Republican form of government, indiscriminate universal suffrage, and the centralization of political and administrative authority in the hands of a bureaucracy. It is opposed on the other hand to all to the national distinctions which are associated with the Christian virtue of patriotism, to the ideal of strongly organized rural communities settled permanently on the land; and finally to the organization of society in classes bound together by ties of common interest and mutual service. Hence its policy tends towards commercialism, a false internationalism and extreme individualism.
It is clear that in a social system organized according to these Masonic ideals, the masses of the people, while nominally free, and in theory the source of all authority in the State, would inevitably become degraded and enslaved. Demoralized by indulgence, deprived of the guidance and help which Christian principles give, isolated and unorganized, mostly bereft of permanent property, having a smattering of literacy, but without real education, they would have little or no power of resistance against the tyranny of bureaucracies or financial combines controlling the Press and the economic life of the country. The substantial freedom, prosperity, and true civilization which accompany or result from the Christian regime would give way to social conditions akin to those of pre-Christian Rome. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 157-159.)
Nothing that I said in college classrooms between 1974 an 2007 or in campaigns for public office or in lectures around the nation or wrote in various publications or have written on this site contains an ounce of originality concerning the state of Western civilization as it spirals into the lowest reaches of the abyss possible, making ancient Rome seem truly tame by way of comparison. We have been given the prescient insights of such giants of Catholic scholarship as Fathers Edward Cahill and Denis Fahey in Ireland and defenders of the immutable Catholic doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King as Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, Monsignor Henri Delassus and Father Theotime de Just in France.
Also, of course, we have been given the prophetic warnings of our true popes, including those of Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX:
This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.
Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right.” But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in none of this. He is just the latest of the conciliar “popes” to express his love of Modernity that is but an expression of the wreckage wrought by Protestantism, whose overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King made possible the rise of Judeo-Masonry.
Father Edward Cahill, quoting a French Jewish apologist, noted that “Progress is the true Mesiah” for Talmudists. The same, of course is true for the entirety of the conciiar revolution and its current grand master, Jorge Mario Bergoglio:
Leroy-Beulieu, a French Jewish apologist, describes thus the social ideals of modern Judaism:
Progress is the true Messiah, whose near advent she [Judaism] proclaims with all her hosannahs. . . . The [French] Revolution was its introduction, our doctrine of human rights its manifesto, and its signal was given to the world, when, at the approach of our Tricolour, the barriers of caste and the walls of the Ghetto fell to the ground. . . . The emancipated Jew takes pride in working for its realization . . . assailing superannuated hierarchies, battling with prejudices . . . struggling to pave the way for future revolution. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 91.)
Yes, “progress” is the true messias of the lords of conciliarism, including, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Bergoglio and his minions are constantly extolling the “progress” that has been made in the “liturgical reform and renewal,” the “progress” that has made made in effecting “Christian unity,” the “progress” that has been made in “human rights” in the world, the “progress” that has been made in “understanding” the Jews and the “necessity” of the State of Israel, the “progress” that has been made in Scriptural exegesis, the “progress” that has been made in “pastoral outreach” to “gays” and the “transgendered,” the “progress” that has been made in “education” and in the provision of “universal health care” by the civil state, the “progress” that has been made by the “empowerment” of women in the word and the conciliar church, etc.
Pope Pius IX condemned the belief that the Roman Pontiff had to “reconciled” to “progress” in the world:
X.[CONDEMNED] ERRORS HAVING REFERENCE TO MODERN LIBERALISM
77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. — Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.
78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.
79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.
80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861.
The faith teaches us and human reason demonstrates that a double order of things exists, and that we must therefore distinguish between the two earthly powers, the one of natural origin which provides for secular affairs and the tranquillity of human society, the other of supernatural origin, which presides over the City of God, that is to say the Church of Christ, which has been divinely instituted for the sake of souls and of eternal salvation…. The duties of this twofold power are most wisely ordered in such a way that to God is given what is God’s (Matt. 22:21), and because of God to Caesar what is Caesar’s, who is great because he is smaller than heaven. Certainly the Church has never disobeyed this divine command, the Church which always and everywhere instructs the faithful to show the respect which they should inviolably have for the supreme authority and its secular rights….
. . . Venerable Brethren, you see clearly enough how sad and full of perils is the condition of Catholics in the regions of Europe which We have mentioned. Nor are things any better or circumstances calmer in America, where some regions are so hostile to Catholics that their governments seem to deny by their actions the Catholic faith they claim to profess. In fact, there, for the last few years, a ferocious war on the Church, its institutions and the rights of the Apostolic See has been raging…. Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects. It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which gathers its troops against the Church of Christ, takes its strength. In the past Our predecessors, vigilant even from the beginning in Israel, had already denounced them to the kings and the nations, and had condemned them time and time again, and even We have not failed in this duty. If those who would have been able to avert such a deadly scourge had only had more faith in the supreme Pastors of the Church! But this scourge, winding through sinuous caverns, . . . deceiving many with astute frauds, finally has arrived at the point where it comes forth impetuously from its hiding places and triumphs as a powerful master. Since the throng of its propagandists has grown enormously, these wicked groups think that they have already become masters of the world and that they have almost reached their pre-established goal. Having sometimes obtained what they desired, and that is power, in several countries, they boldly turn the help of powers and authorities which they have secured to trying to submit the Church of God to the most cruel servitude, to undermine the foundations on which it rests, to contaminate its splendid qualities; and, moreover, to strike it with frequent blows, to shake it, to overthrow it, and, if possible, to make it disappear completely from the earth. Things being thus, Venerable Brothers, make every effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects. Make known and attack those who, whether suffering from, or planning, deception, are not afraid to affirm that these shady congregations aim only at the profit of society, at progress and mutual benefit. Explain to them often and impress deeply on their souls the Papal constitutions on this subject and teach, them that the masonic associations are anathematized by them not only in Europe but also in America and wherever they may be in the whole world. (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)
Pope Pius IX understood who was behind the conceits of Freemasonry to substitute the false god of “progress,” praised by none other but the soon-to-be “Blessed Paul the Sick” in Populorum Progessio, March 26, 1967:
42. What must be aimed at is complete humanism.[44] And what is that if not the fully-rounded development of the whole man and of all men? A humanism closed in on itself, and not open to the values of the spirit and to God Who is their source, could achieve apparent success. True, man can organize the world apart from God, but “without God man can organize it in the end only to man’s detriment. An isolated humanism is an inhuman humanism”.[45] There is no true humanism but that which is open to the Absolute and is conscious of a vocation which gives human life its true meaning. Far from being the ultimate measure of all things, man can only realize himself by reaching beyond himself. As Pascal has said so well: “Man infinitely surpasses man“.[46]
43. There can be no progress towards the complete development of man without the simultaneous development of all humanity in the spirit of solidarity. As We said at Bombay: ” Man must meet man, nation meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God. In this mutual understanding and friendship, in this sacred communion, we must also begin to work together to build the common future of the human race“.[47] We also suggested a search for concrete and practical ways of organization and cooperation, so that all available resources be pooled and thus a true communion among all nations be achieved. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Populorum Progressio, March 26, 1967.)
This is completely Judeo-Masonic as it celebrates “man” and his “humanism,” albeit with some generic reference to God without an insistence that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI’s false “pontificate” was dedicated to the celebration of “man” and his “progress.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio is also one who celebrates the “joy” of the “progress” that has been made in the world and his false church since the “Second” Vatican Council.
In sum and substance, therefore, the goals of Universal Israelite Alliance, proclaimed n 1869, are identical to those adopted by the “popes” of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Father Cahill provided of how this is so:
The national aims and ideals here attributed to-—although they belong, probably, only to a comparatively small section of — the Jewish nation, are practically identical with those of Freemasonry. Hence, an international Jewish synod held at Leipsic, 1869, passed the following resolution:
This Synod recognizes that the development and realization of modern ideas are the surest guarantee in favour of the Jewish race for the present and future.
It seems clear that the ‘modern ideas’ here referred to are those of un-Christian Liberalism, of which Freemasonry has been the protagonist for the past two centuries.
The professed objects of the Universal Israelite Alliance founded in 1860 (whose headquarters are in Paris, and which is probably the most influential and most representative body of the Jewish nation), are similar to the professed aims of Freemasonry. These objects are thus summarized by its founder, the Jew, Adolphe Cremieux, who for many years held the position of Grand Master of the Supreme Council of the Ancient Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: — –
The Universal Israelite Alliance . . . addresses itself to every type of worship. It wishes to interpenetrate all religions, as it has found access to all countries. . . . Let all men of enlightenment, without distinction of sect, find a means of union in the Universal Israelite Association, whose aims are so noble, so broad, and so highly civilizing. . . . To reach out a friendly hand to all who, although born in a different worship from ours, offer us the hand of fellowship, acknowledging that all religions which are based on morality and acknowledge God ought to be friendly towards one another: thus to destroy the barriers separating what is destined one day to be united— that is the grand and supreme object of our Alliance. … I summon to our Association our brethren of every form of worship. Let them come to us . . . Our grand mission is to put the Jewish population in touch with the authorities in every country … to make our voices heard in the cabinets of ministers and in the ears of princes, whatever be the religion that is despised, persecuted, or attacked.
The striking similarity between this programme and the religious ideals of Freemasonry (humanitarianism, cosmopolitanism, and non-sectarianism, or religious indifference) needs no elaboration. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 90-91,)
In like manner, of course, it is the case that the striking similarity of the program of the Universal Israelite Alliance and the program of the “Second” Vatican Council, both as adopted thereat and as implemented by the postconciliar “popes,” needs not much in the way of further elaboration.
Just consider, however, the words of the conciliar Vatican’s Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin, who spoke of “Pope Francis’s” upcoming trip to Jordan and Israel, which begins tomorrow, the Feast of Our Lady Help of Christians, in terms that would have warmed the hearts of the Talmudists of the Universal Israelite Alliance in 1869 just as the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council were convening to condemn the very errors that the conciliar revolutionaries have endorsed and propagated for over five decades now:
The Vatican Secretary of State said that in its dialogue with Israelis and Palestinians, the Holy See wishes to see “the right of Israel to exist and to enjoy peace and security within internationally recognized borders; the right of the Palestinian people to have a sovereign and independent homeland, the right to move freely, the right to live in dignity.”
Cardinal Parolin said that during the visit, Pope Francis will insist on these issues in line with Holy See policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and urge that “the sacred and universal character of the city of Jerusalem , its cultural and religious heritage” be recognized so that it may be “a place of pilgrimage for the followers of the three monotheistic religions .” (Vatican Secretary of State expresses hopes for Jorge’s visit to Holy Land.)
Just a little something for everyone, a veritable Rodney King “Why can’t we all just get along” message that equates the one and only true religion, Catholicism, with Judaism and Mohammedanism, and that that verifies once again the nonexistent “right” of the Zionists to the territory of the Holy Land, which brave Catholic crusaders sought to rescue from the Mohammedans and their desecration of the sites made holy by the Incarnation, Nativity, Hidden Life, Public Ministry and Passion, Death, Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
While Jorge Mario Bergoglio will doubtlessly defend the rights of Palestinians to their own homeland, he will do so in the context of praising the existence of the State of Israel as a manifestation of God’s will so that the three “great monotheistic religions” can live together in peace, thus providing a model of “peace” and “tolerance” for the whole world. It will be pure Judeo-Masonry from start to finish.
Father Cahill explained that no less a figure than the adversary himself uses the Talmudic synagogue as the means to destroy that which is indestructible, the Catholic Church:
Hence Pere Deschamps writes, apropos of the present question: —
Judaism itself is a kind of Freemasonry, owing to the national solidarity of the Jews, their cosmopolitanism, which sets the Jews free from all local and patriotic ties, and finally, the opposition of the Jews to Christianity.
On the same subject M. Doinel, at one time member of the Council of the Grand Orient, who in recent years has become a Catholic, writes: —
How often have I heard the Freemasons lament the dominance of the Jews. . . . Ever since the Revolution the Jews have taken possession of the Masonic lodges more and more completely : and their dominance is now unquestioned. The Cabala rules as mistress in the inner lodges : and the Jewish spirit dominates the lower grades. . . . In the mind of Satan the synagogue has an all important part to play. . . . The great enemy counts on the Jews to govern Masonry as he counts on Masonry to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ.
It is in fact only the Cabahstic elements in Freemasonry that can account adequately for its envenomed and aggressive opposition to the true Church, and its never-flagging efforts for the undermining and destruction of the Christian organization of society.’
This intimate connexion between the two powers [Freemasonry and Cabalistic Judaism] [writes R. Lambelin] is becoming so evident that there is no longer any attempt made to deny it. The Jewish lodges of B’ne Berith, which originated in the English-speaking countries, have swarmed all over Europe, and even into Asia; and they assume the leadership of control in the whole Masonic organization. Under cover of Theosophy a new religion, which is specifically Jewish, though enveloped in a nebulous mist that obscures its character, is bidding fair to take the place of the traditional Christian belief which it flatters, and insensibly destroys.
Finally, the history of the Jews of Europe during the past three or four centuries is suggestive in this connection. The emancipation of the Jews and the unprecedented growth of the influence and power of the great Jewish financiers have synchronized with the rise and growth of the Masonic movement of the past two centuries.
Up to the sixteenth century the Jews were excluded from practically all the Christian States of Europe. With the rise of Humanism, however, in the fifteenth century, and the accentuation of the other causes that finally led to the break up of Christendom, the Jews managed to improve their position. They gradually gained readmittance, sometimes covert, sometimes openly avowed, into most of the countries from which they had been excluded. But although they were allowed to live under the protection of the laws, they were not accorded full civic rights in any of the Christian States. They engaged in trade and carried on usury, by means of which they frequently acquired immense wealth. But they were not permitted to hold public offices, and were treated as aliens. They lived usually in ghettos, apart from the Christian community.
After the Protestant revolt, and especially under the influence of the Calvinistic sections of Protestantism, such as the Huguenots in France, the Puritans in Britain, and the Dutch and Swiss Calvinists, the position of the Jews gradually improved more and more. Finally, with the rise of the Liberalism of the eighteenth century, which was fostered and promoted by Masonic influence, the Jews were accorded full rights of citizenship, first in France and then, owing to the expansion of the French Napoleonic Empire, in nearly every country of Europe and America. In France the Jews were enfranchised in 1791 at the instance of the Jacobins, the most aggressive and militant of the anti-Christian Masonic organizations of that time. Ever since that time, with the exception, perhaps, of the early Napoleonic period, the Masonic Jews and the Masonic societies have dominated the public life of France, whose anti-clericalism, secularism, and divorce-laws have mostly been inspired from that source. Roumania, where the Jews did not possess the full rights of citizenship, and were precluded from acquiring property in land was forced by Bismarck (author of the Kulturcamp, and closely identified with Freemasonry of the most extreme type) at the Congress of Berlin (1878) to grant them full civic rights. At the Peace of Paris (1918-1919) Poland was forced, in the same way, to grant such privileges to the Jews living within her borders as almost to constitute the Jewish colony a kind of State within the State. At the same Congress the Jewish leaders were accorded practical control of Palestine as a quasi-independent or incipient Jewish State under the protection of Britain. Today Jewish financial and political power is especially felt in the countries which have fallen most completely under the influence of Freemasonry and un-Christian Liberalism, such as the United States of America, England, France, Germany, Russia, Roumania, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 91-95.)
This is why there has long been a kinship between Protestants, especially those who belong to evangelical or fundamentalist sects, and Zionism as Talmudism welcomed the Protestant Revolutions in the Sixteenth Century as the means to work assiduously against their mutual enemy: the Catholic Church. And this is why one of the most important litmus tests amongst the naturalists in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right” is support for “America’s only friend” in the Middle East, Israel.
Who cares about the ransacking of the homes of the Palestinians in 1948 and thereafter?
Who cares about the atrocities that the Israeli Defense Force have committed against Palestinians, both Mohammedan and Christian, Syrians, the Lebanese?
Perhaps more to the point is that God Himself used the Romans to expel the Jews from the Holy Land in 70 A.D. as a punishment for their infidelity by refusing to convert to the true Faith, and they were not mean to return there to establish a “homeland.”
Who cares about this little fact?
Yes, the State of Israel exists. Its existence is an accomplished fact. However, the well-financed and heavily armed State of Israel has more than enough means to protect its own citizens from all manner of attacks, There can never be true peace in the Middle East–or anywhere else in the world for that matter–unless all there say together, “Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.”
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not bringing that message to the Holy Land, of course. He is bringing a false peace of “peace” founded on “mutual respect,” “tolerance” and “religious liberty.” His is a message of Judeo-Masonry, and anyone who doubts this or who says that it is “impolitic” to even state this publicly is stuck in a fantasy world that things are somehow going to get “better” when the very signs of the times point to the coming of Antichrist himself. He is content to help the Talmudists in their goal to blot out the Holy Name from everyday public life, content to do the bidding of his fellow enemies of Christ the King and His Most Blessed Mother’s Fatima Mesage, Heaven’s own Peace Plan.
Antichrist certainly will be pleased with what will transpire in Jordan and Israel in the next three days, which is why we must pray Rosaries of reparation at this time. So many people will be deceived.
So many people, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, will come to believe that some kind of “inter-religious” peace is possible.
So many people, Catholics non-Catholics alike, will be reaffirmed in the very anti-Incarnational premises of Modernity, which are so celebrated by the lords of conciliarism, that have enslaved them to the civil state and to the wiles of those in the synagogue and the lodges who have converted them to being, no matter their particular religious creed, if any, utter naturalists who shudder at any and all talk of the true Faith, the one and only foundation of personal and social order.
Modernism’s “god of progress” must be opposed as it is the exact same “god” as Judeo-Masonry, something that can be seen very clearly by the following passage from Pope Saint Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:
It is thus, Venerable Brethren, that for the Modernists, whether as authors or propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor, indeed, are they without forerunners in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our predecessor Pius IX wrote: ‘These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts.’ On the subject of revelation and dogma in particular, the doctrine of the Modernists offers nothing new. We find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX, where it is enunciated in these terms: ”Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the progress of human reason’; and condemned still more solemnly in the Vatican Council: ”The doctrine of the faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence also that sense of the sacred dogmas is to be perpetually retained which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth.’ Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith, barred by this pronouncement; on the contrary, it is supported and maintained. For the same Council continues: ‘Let intelligence and science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and vigorously in individuals, and in the mass, in the believer and in the whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries — but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation.’ (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Our Lady is the great foe of all heresies, including Modernism, whose rise was made possible by Protestantism and its alliance with Judeo-Masonry.
May we ever have recourse to her, especially during the next few days under her title as Our Lady Help of Christian and through her Most Holy Rosary, to pray for he conversion of all of those who are attacking the true Faith, including Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself, and as we continue to pray each day for our own conversion away from our sins as we seek to offer up reparation for them to the throne of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Christ the King, through her own most Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Alleluia! He is Risen!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint John Baptist de Rossi, pray for us.