Recycling the Revolution
Believe me, the evil I denounce is more terrible than the Revolution.... that which I fear is Liberal Catholicism, which endeavours to unite two principles as repugnant to each other as fire and water ....
|
| Blessed Pius IX (1871) |
[W]hat has become of the Catholicism
of the Sillon? Alas! this organisation... is now [part] of the great
movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the
establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world... the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak...
|
| St. Pius X (1910) |
[W]e are unable to ignore the Second Vatican Council and its consequences... With all our hearts we support the Revolution of John XXIII... This courageous concept of the Freedom of Thought that lies at the core of our Freemasonic lodges, has spread in a truly magnificent manner right under the Dome of St. Peter's.
|
Yves Marsaudon (1964)
|
Before Vatican II, in theology, as in other areas, the discipline was fixed. After the council there has been a revolution — a chaotic revolution — with free discussion on everything. There is now no common theology or philosophy as there was before.
|
| Cardinal Danneels (2001) |
A crude revolutionary timeline, the opening
quotes reveal at a glance our rapid rapprochement with "the new era
inaugurated in 1789": which is to say our descent into the
revolutionary pit.
Within eighty years of the French Revolution
and the prideful, hateful, destructive masonic spirit it unleashed,
Pius IX could not have sounded more contemporary in denouncing three of
its primary acids eating away at faith, truth, and life:
Atheism in legislation, indifference in
matters of religion, and the pernicious maxims which go under the name
of Liberal Catholicism.
These, he wrote on 18 June 1871 to a French
deputation headed by the Bishop of Nevers, "are the true causes of the
destruction of states." He well understood, however, that the last item
was the most frightening and destructive of all:
That which I fear is not the Commune of
Paris — no — ... I have said so more than forty times, and I repeat it
to you now, through the love that I bear you. The real scourge of
France is Liberal Catholicism....
Within another forty years, the rebellious
spirit of naturalism had gained such a grip on the hearts and minds of
the clergy that St. Pius X was forced to issue his powerful
intellectual and disciplinary counterpunch, Pascendi (1907).
It is testimony to the preternatural
anti-spirit of the Revolution that even the mighty Pope Saint failed to
eradicate its clerical partisans and fellow-travellers in toto. It did
not stop the liberal torch of "the new era" being passed to succeeding
generations: not least to the 'moderate' faction of bastion-razing
Balthasar acolytes (Karol Wojtyla, Joseph Ratzinger, Christoph
Schönborn, et. al.) Yet if Pascendi tragically failed to knock
the Modernists out for the count, it at least felled them so heavily
that they retreated to lick their wounds and bide their time, as Pius X
turned from their false philosophy and theology to their
socio-political errors.
The Sillon
"What has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon?" he asked several years later, in his 1910 Apostolic Letter Nôtre Charge Apostolique ("Our Apostolic Mandate)." He was referring to Le Sillon ("The
Furrow"), a social movement established in 1894 by Catholic students
and supported by countless French bishops and priests. Seduced by the zeitgeist, it
soon came to place democracy on a pedestal, and priests and laity on
the same egalitarian footing during study workshops. Concurrently, its
publication went from being a "Catholic review of social action," to a
"Review of democratic action," in which a Catholic tone gave way to
populist democratism pursuant to the principles of 1789.
"A socio-political set-up resting on [the]
two pillars of Liberty and Equality (to which Fraternity will presently
be added), is what they call Democracy," wrote Pius X, alluding to its
Revolutionary roots. In a scintillating analysis, he laid bare the Sillon's Catholic pretensions to reveal their false (masonic) democracy rooted in the radical autonomy of man. "Le Sillon places
public authority primarily in the people, from whom it then flows into
the government in such a manner, however, that it continues to reside
in the people," he wrote. The divine and natural truth, on the
contrary, is that some men can command others only because
"their authority to do so derives from, and is a participation in the
supreme authority of God." Or as St Paul put it to the Romans [13:1]: "there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God."
"By ignoring the laws governing human nature," wrote Pius X, the Sillonists lead
society "not toward progress, but toward death." They "dream of
changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future
City built on different principles; and they dare to proclaim these
more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the
present Christian City rests."
The "chaotic revolution" mainstreamed
In a brutal coup d'etat just fifty years
after this masterly papal rebuke, resurgent Modernists, still bearing
deep-seated scars and anti-Thomistic bitterness from their Pascendi-pummelling, revived the same deathly Sillonist programme at Vatican II; replacing the supernatural Gospel of salvation with the naturalistic gospel of social reform.
The Lodge was exultant. Having long planned and prophesied this seismic shift, they knew what was to follow. "If there are still some remnants of thought, reminiscent of the Inquisition, they will be drowned in a rising flood of ecumenism and liberalism," declared Yves Marsaudon in his 1964 book, Ecumenism As Seen By A French Freemason. "One of the most tangible consequences will be the lowering of spiritual barriers that divide the world."
That was the nub of the "chaotic revolution"
so fondly recalled by Belgium's Prince of Darkness, Cardinal Danneels:
the post-conciliar revolt that jettisoned traditional theology,
philosophy, discipline and customs in search of secular chimeras. "More
terrible than the Revolution" itself, it was Blessed Pius IX's
definition of Hell: the "scourge" of Liberal Catholicism officially sanctioned as 'Catholicism.'
How perfectly their modus operandi mimicked the Sillonists —
who, wrote St. Pius X, presented their errors "in dynamic language
which, concealing vague notions and ambiguous expressions with
emotional and high-sounding words... set ablaze the hearts of men in
pursuit of ideals which, whilst attractive, are nonetheless nefarious."
"Vague," "ambiguous," "emotional," "high-sounding" ... the spirit of the Sillon coalesced
in the Council documents, spewing forth and mainstreaming the very
Liberal Catholic anti-spirit Blessed Pius IX condemned "more than forty
times."
The making of Don Jorge
In that respect, Jorge Bergoglio is just one
more egregious product of his liberal times. Pope Francis, however, is
the creation of Godfried Danneels and other Modernist cardinals united
in their opposition to Cardinal Ratzinger and then Benedict XVI.
Speaking on 23 September 2015 at the launch of his authorised biography,
Danneels laughingly described this cabal as "a mafia club that bore
the name St. Gallen," the Swiss city where they secretly met from 1995
until 2006. These mafiosi — comprising all the usual suspects: Kasper,
Lehman, Martini, Hume, Murphy-O'Connor, Silvestrini, et. al. — wanted a
drastic reform of the Church, said Danneels, to make it "much more
modern." Jorge Bergoglio was to be their capo di tutti capi.(1)
Over many years, using their individual
networks which almost saw him elected at the 2005 conclave, they
finally engineered the elevation of Don Jorge as papal Godfather.
Before such arrogance, readers must
understand that these elite ecclesiastical revolutionaries have been a
law unto themselves for half-a-century. Faithless. Untouchable. Living
well at lay expense (their regular airfares to St. Gallen included),
they do what they like. The notorious Cardinal Danneels is wholly
representative.
There is a whiff of brimstone about Danneels.
With a smile like the winter sun glinting on a coffin-plate, you
wouldn't be surprised to find he had steel teeth. In 2008, he proudly
admitted having dressed in ritualistic masonic garb to deliver a
lecture at a Belgian masonic temple.(2)A
man who completely separates political decisions from moral norms, in
1990 he even tried to persuade King Baudouin to sign the Belgian
abortion bill into law (— the devout Baudouin told him to bug off, then
briefly abdicated in protest while they passed their murderous 'law'.)
He has also referred to 'gay marriage' laws
as a "positive development," stating that the French people should
"obey the law" and not oppose it. In 2010, recordings revealed him
urging a victim not to reveal 13 years of sexual abuse at the hands of
his friend Bishop Vangheluwe of Bruges. While it goes without saying
that he promotes the deadly condom-AIDS nexus.
This, dear reader,is the sulphurous
ringleader of the "mafia club" that conjured up the startled figure
prodded onto the papal balcony on 13 March 2013 (— with "discreet
king-maker" Godfried Danneels close by, noted Belgian newspaper Le Vif).In a last ditch effort to realise the "nefarious" Sillonistic ideals
denounced by Pius X, they now had their mouthpiece to "set ablaze the
hearts of men" with heightened levels of "vague, emotional,
high-sounding" post-conciliar verbiage, and doctrine be damned.
Their plan reached a crescendo last May with
the papal cry "to move forward in a bold cultural revolution"
predicated on eco-alarmism that pushes "a true world political
authority... empowered to impose penalties for damage inflicted on the
environment." Not a Catholic counter-revolution, mind. Not a
movement of personal conversion and adherence to Catholic moral
teachings in order to topple the devastating sexual revolution
engineered by the cultural Marxists. Not a concerted drive to establish
the Social Reign of Christ the King by widespread preaching on the
proper understanding of political power, according to which the Church
becomes the conscience of the State, and Her teachings the salvific
yardstick of all cultural, social, political and economic activity.
On the contrary, in his rush is to preach
appeasement, compromise, inclusivity and non-judgmentalism under the
Green umbrella, Francis proposes instead a further acceleration away from the Social Kingship of Christ, towards a
New World Order "empowered" to cleanse the last remnants of Catholic
faith, conscience, and reason itself, from the public square.
Seamless garment sell out
Just two-and-a-half years ago it was
impossible to imagine a Church "much more modern" than the Liberal
Catholic horror we already suffered at the hands of Danneels & Co.:
a hyper-protestantised Church of girl altar boys, syncretic Assisi
extravaganzas, institutionalised sacrilege, worldly clergy, empty
convents, seminaries and parishes, and every kind of heretical
dysfunction. It took the papal poster boy of the St. Gallen crew to
broaden our horizons. And how!
Ever since Jorge Bergoglio's contrived
election, this magazine has been a running factual record of his
self-contradictory efforts to unite principles "as repugnant to each
other as fire and water." The May 2015 publication of Laudato Si was
the most spectacular effort to date. Mixing truth and error,
Catholicism and Socialism, God and Mammon... Modernist ideology made
papal common cause with Green ideology to offer souls ideology as
religion.
As noted last month, the recyclical does include
intermittent pro-life passages, and due warnings against gender
ideology and population control. But these token contributions are
deliberately outweighed and cancelled out by a preponderance of
eco-propaganda, with all its tiresome clichés and Teilhardian
gobbledygook masquerading as spirituality.
Effectively, Laudato Si is a
jumbo-sized application of Cardinal Bernadin's perfidious 'seamless
garment.' In particular, it let the population-controllers off the hook
(as brilliantly underlined last month by Randy Engel),
while marginalising the pro-life cause in general: refusing to
highlight and differentiate the genocide of unborn children from a
catch-all eco-ethic of 'sustainable life'. Even with the US abortion
industry on the skids, Francis pushed the same line during his recent
American visit, most notably during his address to Congress. Amid wild
media applause, John Jalsevac of LifeSiteNews summarised what really transpired:
The timing of Pope Francis’ speech to
Congress could hardly be seen as anything short of divinely planned –
coming on the same day as the Senate is scheduled to vote on whether to
defund Planned Parenthood, the country’s number one killer of unborn
babies.
Meanwhile, on Monday, Democrats halted a
ban on most late-term abortions. On Friday, the House voted to pass a
bill making it 1st degree murder to kill a baby born alive after a
botched abortion. Add to this the fact that millions have watched those
undercover Planned Parenthood videos in recent weeks [revealing PP's selling of organs plundered from the babies they kill], and it becomes clear that the groundwork has been laid for an unprecedented national conversation on abortion.
Hopes that the pope’s address
could help sway public support in favor of life at this critical moment
were raised when he spoke to the assembled lawmakers of the need to
protect life at “every stage of development.” Those watching
naturally assumed that this remark was prelude to some additional words
addressing the abortion issue, and perhaps even the Planned Parenthood
scandal.
However, in a curious
bait-and-switch that left many pro-life politicians in the chamber in
puzzled silence, the pope instead turned his attention immediately to
the death penalty, describing how “this conviction has led
me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels
for the global abolition of the death penalty.”
Even the New York Times took note of the unexpected change of direction, describing how, “instead of continuing on to talk about the need to end abortion, he pivots to the
death penalty.”
death penalty.”
Another clear opening to speak
specifically to the abortion issue came when the pope spoke about
“money that is drenched in blood, often innocent blood.” The phrase is a perfect encapsulation of the Planned Parenthood aborted baby parts scandal. Disappointingly, however, the pope connected these words only to the arms trade. [LSN, 24/9/15]
And so the baby-trafficking Planned
Parenthood lived to abort and traffic another day — on the American
taxpayer's dime. Way beyond "disappointing," a more heinous sin of
omission is hard to imagine. Even 'diabolic disorientation' does not
adequately convey the enormity of this seamless garment sell out. To
sidestep such a momentous — historic — opportunity to speak Catholic
truth to power, underlined and encapsulated everything we have
observed and documented about Pope Francis. Not least his calculated
retreats to the Quiet Zone: where he "never proclaims Church teaching
out loud at a moment when the dispute over an issue has become heated,"
as Sandro Magister put it.
The papal silence was even more deafening after Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix ordered his flock to man the barricades! Shortly after the Congressional non-event, in a plea to his flock of 29 September, His Lordship did not hold back:
The papal silence was even more deafening after Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix ordered his flock to man the barricades! Shortly after the Congressional non-event, in a plea to his flock of 29 September, His Lordship did not hold back:
As I write this exhortation, videos are
being released documenting the barbaric practice of selling baby body
parts by Planned Parenthood. Since this infamous agency receives around
half a billion dollars each year from the U.S. Government, funds to
carry on their slaughter of innocents, no American citizen, and
certainly no man, can remain silent about this travesty of our times.
We need to get off the sidelines and stand up for life on the front
lines. We need faith like that of our fathers who defended the
children of previous generations and who gave up their own lives
rather than abandon their faith in Christ. My sons and brothers, men of
the Diocese of Phoenix, we need you to step into the breach!
'And so I withstand Francis to the face,' he may as well have signed off, 'because he is to be blamed' [Gal. 2:11].
Bait-and-switch
The key phrase in Mr Jalsevac's report is
"bait-and-switch." Together with his retreat to purposeful silence
whenever a raised papal voice is required, Francis employs this tactic
with devilish dexterity.
To deflect attention from his shameful antics
and corrosive Liberalism, the Pope tosses out scraps of orthodoxy and
tradition; soundbites and token gestures for which neo-conservatives
eagerly scavenge, hold up, and acclaim, even as their hero turns away
to undermine the Faith once again. Hence they rejoiced over the few
pro-life lines contained in his Congressional address, ignoring the
dismal fact that "only 75 words out of the 3,400 words" of the Pope’s
address to Congress "had anything to do with anything even close" to
life and marriage, as leading US Evangelical Albert Mohler noted with a
heavy heart.
President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Mohler was most alarmed that in Congress the Pope "never even mentioned Jesus Christ."
Alarming indeed. And telling. Yet hardly a surprising omission for a
pope who has refused to make the Sign of the Cross over non-Catholics
for fear of offending them! (A pontiff whose pectoral cross also drops
under his sash and out of sight, with alarming regularity, in the
company of rabbis.(3))
"Furthermore," added Mohler, "among the
things he didn’t mention were specifically the Catholic Church’s
concern about abortion and its definition of marriage as exclusively
the union of a man and a woman. Instead what the Pope referenced in
terms of those issues was a very fuzzy and evasive approach that left
many people wondering if he was actually talking about either abortion
or marriage at all." (Which of course was the purpose of the exercise,
and precisely why the "mafia club" chose Jorge!)
Mohler explained that while Francis did
mention marriage, "he never defined it and he certainly didn’t draw
attention to the fact that the Roman Catholic Church identifies
marriage as and only as the union of a man and a woman." (That he also
avoided the elephant in the room — diabolic sodomy — goes without
saying.) Mohler continued:
Instead he offered a statement that can be interpreted by virtually anyone as that individual may wish to interpret it, mentioning marriage and the family without defining either. And speaking
of the future of marriage in such a way that virtually no one
regardless of their position on the moral revolution can disagree with
him. Furthermore, even though the sanctity of human life is a
fundamental teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, it was virtually
missing from the Pope’s statement; explicitly missing was any reference to abortion and to the fact that abortion is now one of the most controversial frontline issues in America today.
Commonality and common ground
The American President was quick to exploit
the loophole-laden address, especially the papal warning about a
"temptation which we must especially guard against: the simplistic
reductionism which sees only good or evil; or, if you will, the
righteous and sinners." Obama immediately shoved that compromising
passage in the face of Republicans fighting to defund Planned
Parenthood, while using it to justify his own fight to maintain
hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for America's
leading abortion provider. "I would just ask members to really reflect
on what His Holiness said," he piously intoned,
— not in the particulars, but in the
general problem that we should be open to each other, we should not
demonise each other, we should not assume that we have a monopoly on
the truth or on what’s right, that we listen to each other and show
each other respect and that we show regard for the most vulnerable in
our society.
This meeting of presidential and papal minds also reflects their mutual delusion: viz.,
the familiar refrain of personal humility, deference, and respect.
Apropos Francis, we have comprehensively exposed the falsity of his
high humble self-regard. While for his part, the narcissistic bisexual
Obama lost his moral compass long ago.(4)
Either promoting or complicit in every
degenerate political campaign, Barack Obama has no regard whatsoever
for "what's right," and so little "respect" for the "most vulnerable in
our society" that he zealously defends the killing of babies
in plain sight (just as they are emerging from the womb). He is also
the most mendacious and divisive president in American history; an
Alinskyite "community organiser" trained to "rub raw the sores
of discontent," using systematic deception and the language of
morality to conceal Saul Alinsky's destructive Marxist agenda.
That short bio puts the hypocritical magnitude of
the presidential moralising above on a par with the epic papal
duplicity we regularly critique. Noting that Obama's call echoed similar
words he made on the campus of Notre Dame in 2009, when he said both
sides of the abortion debate must speak with "open hearts, open minds,
fair-minded words," LifeSiteNews pointed out that
pro-life advocates say the president has
demonized them with an endless stream of federal actions: prosecuting
sidewalk counselors, gathering intelligence on the pro-life movement,
and branding pro-life Americans as potential domestic terrorists in
numerous federal reports.
Even more significant than the common
double-speak, however, is the fact that both are front men for vested
New World Order [NWO] interests: Francis for the heretical St. Gallen
crew, and Obama for more venal Wall Street varieties. This commonality
explains how such a degenerate President can find genuine succour and
encouragement in the words of reigning Pope. In other words, if Francis
appeared to 'drop the ball' in Congress — to miss a one-off chance to strike a major blow against the Culture of Death (which isthe
NWO) — it was only to allow his like-minded political counterpart, and
cultural Marxist par excellence, to pick up that ball and run with it.
Albert Mohler explained the underlying papal intention well enough:
It represents an opportunity to avoid having to get to the hard edges of Christian truth. It is an intentional effort to avoid a direct confrontation with the secularising culture. It is an effort to try to get along in terms of this moral revolution, not
so much at this point by changing the teachings of his church, but by
soft-pedalling them or in the case of his address to Congress not even
mentioning them. Not even daring to define marriage which is so central
to the Catholic Church that it is actually one of the sacraments
recognised by the church, but the Pope didn’t reference marriage and he
didn’t define it and that is incredibly telling.
Under the Green umbrella
Unlike our neocons, Protestant Evangelicals,
for all their many faults, are not blind to Catholic events unfolding
before their eyes. They are not distracted by the mass of
contradictions that define Francis, nor fooled by his bait-and-switch
tactics. Like Mohler, they understand that the convergence comes to
pass more by papal soft-pedalling or omission than actual denial of the
Faith.
A simple cartoon captured the mentality and
the process. Sitting on one side of a confessional screen, Obama
confesses: "I'm the most pro-abortion President in history." Comes the
papal reply from the other side: "But where do you stand on Climate
Change?"
Voilà! — the naturalistic sea change, in
orientation and emphasis, by Francis and his backers. As St. Pius X
said of the leaders of the Sillon, the zeitgeist has
"carried them away towards another Gospel which they thought was the
true Gospel of Our Saviour." The false gospel in question is of course
the social gospel. "A chimera, bring[ing] Socialism in its
train," warned St. Pius, the social gospel joins up infidelity with
godless political outcomes like night follows day. And so the syncretic
Assisi abominations eventually — inevitably — found the Church
ensconced under the Green umbrella, where all the ideological strains
of Socialism make common socio-political common cause.
Environmentalism — as opposed to
normal healthy concern for good stewardship of the environment — is an
all encompassing ideology that has taken cultural Marxism to a new
totalising level. Materialistic, messianic, implacable, dripping with
emotional appeals and utopian global designs, it mirrors common garden
Socialism. However, tapping into the same wellspring of liberal shame
and guilt that gave us abortion on demand (through self-justifying
feminists), it has been able exaggerate and exploit modern misgivings
about environmental degradation in order to mainstream Socialism as
never before.
Boasting 50+ million legally-sanctioned
surgical murders of unborn children each year, and countless more
chemical abortions, the current Age of Unreason & Genocide has far
outdone Marxist and Fascist regimes in its expedient disregard for human
life. In order to rationalise this mass killing of the unborn, and the
culling of the vulnerable 'useless eaters' who survive the womb (to
spare the planet more bodies, consumers, and CO2 than it can handle),
the West is happily comforted by Environmentalism: which acts to numb,
comfort, and distract the amoral Western conscience. At the same time, a
quasi-religious reverence for Mother Earth fills the spiritual void in
empty, affluent Western lives.
Against that background, the Green juggernaut
and its media lackeys are free to dictate contemporary terms: to shout
down scientific findings that do not fit its pre-determined agenda; to
eschew fair and open debate in favour of demonising dissenters; to
fabricate, distort, and/or bury facts to suit itself.
Instead of condemning this Green ideology out
of hand, in the way pre-conciliar popes denounced its doctrinaire Red
and Brown lineage,(5)Laudato Si as good as sanctioned the neo-fascism/neo-communism underpinning the NWO.
Firstly, by marginalising and misrepresenting Catholic teaching throughout the document, while soft-pedalling urgent priorities — e.g., reducing the abortion tsunami to this single,
tepid mention: "Since everything is interrelated, concern for the
protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of
abortion" (#120). As if his Facebook 'friends' will take any more notice
of that lone reference than they will of the few allusions to
population control, also buried under the 40,000+ other words.
Secondly, by accepting at face value and parroting false Green claims — e.g., "A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system" (#23). This fundamental falsehood requires elaboration.
Secondly, by accepting at face value and parroting false Green claims — e.g., "A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system" (#23). This fundamental falsehood requires elaboration.
An M.D. from Harvard who did postgraduate
work at Salk Institute for Biological Studies in California, the late
best-selling novelist Dr. Michael Crichton (of Jurassic Park fame),
was no dilettante. In a 2003 lecture he famously noted: "There is no
such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science.
If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period."
A post by Brad Miner on The Catholic Thing recounted
that the title of that Crichton lecture was "Aliens Cause Global
Warming," and its message was a cautionary tale about how "science has
in some instances been seduced by the more ancient lures of politics
and publicity." Crichton took on popularisers of scientific fads such
as Carl "Nuclear Winter" Sagan and Paul "Population Bomb" Ehrlich. The
popularity of their doom-and-gloom prophecies was based on a kind of
peer-pressure, consensus politics that endured until the
prognosticators were proved false (— just as the 40-year Piltdown Man
fabrication was enforced as untouchable 'science' until finally
exposed). After applying actual scientific discipline to the global
warming scare, Crichton concluded his talk with a common sense view
that totally escapes the Holy Father:
Nobody believes a weather prediction
twelve hours ahead. Now we’re asked to believe a prediction that goes
out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on
that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds?
It often seems that way. Yet while the Holy
Father may have lost his faith, he still possesses the mental capacity
to establish the lack of "A very solid scientific consensus." Prior to publishing Laudato Si,
a quick Google search for scientific dissidents would have alerted
him, for instance, to one petition co-signed by more than 31,000 American
scientists and engineers (including more than 9,000 PhD's), which
states that CO2 ("carbon") is "harmless" and "beneficial" to the
biosphere; that there is no downside to more CO2; that it's still just a
very tiny trace gas, as essential to all life on earth as H2O. They
also declared as one that
there is no convincing scientific
evidence that human release of... carbon dioxide, methane, or other
greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause
catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the
Earth's climate.
Every co-signer of this Oregon Petition was
vetted, each one has a degree in the hard sciences (including climate
science itself), and each one is named, along with their degree.
Let us not forget, too, that just before the
release of the recyclical, 100 environmental scientists sent Francis a
letter imploring him not to allow himself to be misled by the arguments
of radical environmentalists and by analyses that have not been
demonstrated by environmental science. Dated 27 April, the letter added
that, under the pretext of helping the poor, revolutionary
environmentalists are actually contributing with their proposals to
increase misery around the world.
"Consensus"? With just as little effort the
Holy Father would also have found dozens of scientifically reviewed
reasons why "global warming" is some distance beyond farce, never mind
"very solid consensus." Moreover, he would have quickly discovered that
the foundational statistic repeatedly championed by the disreputable
Al Gore and a host of others, such as President Obama — who even
tweeted on 16 May 2014 that "97% of scientists agree: climate change is
real, man-made and dangerous" — is a total fabrication. The Wall Street Journal reported
that "The assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change
is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction." When further review was
done, it was discovered that a mere 1% of scientists believe human activity is causing most of the climate change.(6)
Green payola
We could devote many entire editions to
exposing the Green hoax: its lies, exaggerations, endemic hypocrisy,
and corruption. Also the hugely expensive energy projects which have
cost the peoples of the West trillions in subsidies and
associated costs. CEOs and executives rake in millions of dollars,
while politicians get lucrative donations for their campaigns, and
scientists get all the funding they need to keep them going, all
courtesy of taxpayers.
Typically, after accepting $1.25 million in
campaign contributions, President Obama made sure to include his
"global warming" plans in his victory speech: "We want our children to
live in an America that isn’t threatened by the destructive power of a
warming planet," he pontificated (as if a ghost writer of Laudato Si). The palm-greasing in this case involved the failed Solyndra green-energy initiative, which cost taxpayers $500 million and created a lot of flack for Obama. A little-known side of the Solyndra story, explains Tom Luongo, is that
Obama, in essence, used taxpayer money to finance his re-election campaign, by funneling it through Solyndra.
You see, when Solyndra fell on hard times, it passed into the hands of
two large private equity investors, Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser.
When $500 million in taxpayer money was given to Solyndra,
both Goldman Sachs and George Kaiser benefited. Coincidentally, both
have made contributions to Obama’s election campaigns adding up to
roughly $1.25 million."
Green payola is endemic. General Electric is
notorious for spending tens of millions of dollars a year to "buy"
green energy credits for its wind turbines and other green technologies
— credits which helped the firm pay ZERO US taxes in 2011. First Solar received $646 million in US government loan guarantees, and has since contributed more than $180,000 to Democratic campaigns.
And so it goes. In America alone, writes
Luongo, a former scientist with the University of Florida, $22 billion
of taxpayer money is redistributed every year to greedy scientists,
politicians, and corporations for "global warming" initiatives. But
these initiatives have ripple effects, mainly the regulations (from
government agencies like the monolithic US Environmental Protection
Agency) that shackle free enterprise and force reliance on foreign
energy. According to Forbes magazine, the total cost of these ripple effects is a staggering $1.75 trillion annually.
Al Gore is the personification of the whole
wicked sham. A wealthy Green demagogue who decries the supposedly
apocalyptic carbon footprint of ordinary folk, the hypocritical Gore
racks up annual electricity and gas bills of $30,000, more than 20 times
the national American average. In 2001, before leaving office as vice
president, Gore was worth less than $2 million. Since then, he has
accumulated $100 million, almost entirely by investing in a handful of
"green-tech" companies, 14 of which received more than $2.5 billion in
loans, grants, tax breaks, and more from the Obama administration. The Telegraph reports
Gore could become the "world’s first carbon billionaire" thanks to his
investments in green companies, all of which benefit from tax dollars
and government loans to "prevent global warming" according to the
Gospel of Al. Which is to say that his multibillion-dollar "carbon
offset" scams are based directly on his own predictions of inevitable climatic meltdown!
Since the apocalypse never comes, he can
continue to preach it to lucrative effect. For example, in 2007, while
accepting his Nobel Prize for his "global warming" initiative (and
quietly pocketing millions of dollars), Gore made a striking
prediction: "The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff," he cried. "It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now."
In 2014, Tom Luongo yawned and duly noted: "It is seven years later,
and recent satellite images show that not only have the icecaps not
melted, they’ve expanded in size by 43% to 63%. Here’s what a Globe and Mail article
had to say: 'An area twice the size of Alaska — America's biggest
state — was open water two years ago and is now covered in ice'."
Empire of lies and self-serving
So much for "the oceans are getting warmer,"
another Gore whopper endlessly repeated by other Green scammers riding
the same mendacious gravy train. We know about the mendacity because
the evidence of outright lying has leaked out of trustworthy scientific
agencies. In the years since our October 2006 'environmental-CO,'
thousands of emails and documents from leading "global warming"
scientists have revealed potential conspiracies, collusions, data
manipulation, destruction of information, and even admission of flaws
that were buried.
One leading scientist, Kevin Trenberth,
admitted: "The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at
the moment and it is a travesty we can’t." A travesty simply because
they were worried about losing their government funding. According to
NASA’s own 2014 data, the world has only warmed a trifling 0.36 degrees
Fahrenheit over the last 35 years (they started measuring the data in
1979) and we experienced the bulk of that warming between 1979 and
1998. During the subsequent 17 years there hasn't been any "global warming." In fact, as mentioned in passing last month, the world is 1.08 degrees cooler than it was in 1998.
In another email, Dr. Phil Jones — a leading
"global warming" advocate at the United Nations — admitted that he used
"Mike’s Nature trick" in a 1999 graph to "hide the decline" in
temperature. While a study done by Stephen Goddard at Real Science revealed
the absurd extent of data manipulation by "climate scientists." He
said: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
been "adjusting" its record by replacing real temperatures with data
"fabricated" by computer models. (The entire "global warming" empire
was constructed on a foundation of wildly inaccurate predictions
derived from the notoriously flawed process of computer-modelling.)
Recently, Professor Robert Stavins — who helped write the 2014 United Nations Climate Report — revealed to Breitbart News that politicians demanded he change and edit parts of the report to fit their needs!
In short, governments, and government-funded
scientists, want to make sure that any "global warming" research
published will say exactly what they want it to say. Although
despicable, on a purely human level, the servility of these scientists
is understandable. "If you work for the government and you stand up and
say, ‘Man-made climate change is all nonsense’ you can kiss your
government job goodbye," says Dr John Casey, a former White House
space program advisor, and one of America’s most successful climate
change researchers and climate prediction experts. "They’ll either make
it hell to work there, or fire you outright," he said.
In the end, mortgages and school fees trump scientific integrity.
Epic waste and lethal failure
It seems Pope Francis was not interested in
discovering any of this: who is using actual science; who is lying and
fear-mongering their way to wealth and fame; and who is so concerned
about keeping government or corporate grants that they will say exactly
what their paymasters want them to say — undertaking
(pseudo-)scientific research with an end goal in mind, only using data
points that support that end goal.
When a pontiff makes great play of being for the poor and against capitalist
greed (capitalism is "the Devil's dung," he railed on his recent Latin
American jaunt), one might reasonably expect him to highlight, and
even denounce in strong terms, the social and familial cost of
capitalo-socialists like Gore lining their Green pockets at taxpayer
expense.
Again, America is indicative. Tom Luongo
figures that the $22 billion the US government spends annually
financing "global warming" initiatives works out at $41,856 a minute
going to waste. While Forbes' $1.75 trillion flow-on figure
equals $3,329,528 wasted every minute! Moreover, the U.S. Energy
Information Administration says these regulations could ultimately
cause gas prices to rise 77% over baseline projections, send 3 million
Americans to the welfare line, and reduce average household income by a
whopping $4,000 each year. Apparently, the dire myriad consequences of
all that were not worth any papal consideration; not even to refute them.
Beyond the financial cost of policies and
programmes adopted to fight the "global warming" phantom, Francis just
as studiously ignored the body count. The recent Volkswagen
diesel-emission scandal is simply the latest in a long line of lethal
consequences of Green zealotry.
According to German newspaper Bild, VW
project engineers determined there was no way to meet both emission
standards and cost controls. Their solution was to apply illegal
software, a so-called defeat device, that switched on emission controls
only when a car was being tested. The scandal has wiped almost €30
billion off the company's value and prompted a raft of government
investigations and lawsuits around the world as the carmaker issues a
mass recall. VW could be hit with as much as $18 billion in fines under
the Clean Air Act in the US and is already facing more than 190
lawsuits by individual car owners.
Standing amid these recriminations, and
renting of garments by VW stockholders, the towering Green Elephant —
the lethality of eco-targets obsessively enforced — was ignored. "The
European switch to diesel engines was a top-down decision as a direct
result of exaggerated fears about climate change," said Tory peer Matt
Ridley. Writing in the Mail on Sunday, he elaborated a parable of our times:
Convinced that the climate was about to
warm rapidly, and extreme weather was about to get much worse, European
governments signed the Kyoto protocol in 1997 and committed to
reducing emissions of carbon dioxide in the hope that this would help.
In the event, the global temperature
stopped rising for 18 years, while droughts, floods and storms also
showed no increase. But in 1998, Britain happily signed up to an EU
agreement with car makers that they would cut carbon dioxide emissions
by 25 per cent over ten years....
As subjects of Brussels, we in Britain
obediently lowered tax on diesel cars, despite knowing that they
produce four times as much nitrogen oxides as a petrol, and 20 times as
many particulates, both bad for human beings.
This is becoming a repetitive story.
Almost every policy adopted to fight climate change has been a
disaster, doing more harm than good — all without making a significant
difference to emissions. And now it is clear that giving tax breaks to
diesel cars made urban air quality worse than it would otherwise have
been, killing possibly 5,000 people a year in this country alone.
[...] The Paris climate conference in
December will be [another] perfect example of this. For the umpteenth
(21st) time, a swarm of politicians and green hangers-on will haggle
over words designed to 'bind' the rest of us into a top-down commitment
to cut carbon dioxide emissions — whatever the cost in money and human
lives.
Silent Spring: recycling the panic
The Supreme Pontiff did not need the Mail on Sunday
to learn about death tolls triggered by wild and unsubstantiated
environmental claims, however. Long before Al Gore there was Rachel
Carson and her deadly Silent Spring. The original template for eco-alarmism, Laudato Si, like Gore's Earth in the Balance, is a mere recycling of its spurious, panic-stricken message.
A Green icon, Carson was a well-known
naturalist who convinced herself that the chemical known as DDT was a
malignant threat to her beloved natural world. In her eagerness to make
her case, vital facts went out the window and unsupported assertions
were invited in. She added cancer to the mix, implying the "rise" in
cancer rates in the 1950s, attributable to improved detection
programmes, was due to pesticides. Based on a couple of dubious cases
in which exposure to DDT allegedly led to cancer in a man and a woman,
Carson derived a universal threat of cancer, particularly involving
children.
Published in 1962, the opening chapter of the
book threw in an apocalyptic scenario for good measure, depicting a
small idyllic town that is suddenly overcome by unseen forces that
kills local birds and threatens all other forms of life. She also
suggested that DDT leaking into the ocean would kill off phytoplankton,
depriving the earth's atmosphere of oxygen. Silent Spring spent 31 weeks on the New York Times
bestseller list. It set the pattern for all the eco-crusading fighters
of smog, ozone depletion, mobile phones, or "global warming". Indeed,
Al Gore, who wrote the introduction to the thirtieth anniversary
edition in 1992, learned all he knows from Rachel Carson. Including
which inconvenient truths to omit!
Nowhere, for instance, does Carson mention
the hundreds of millions of lives saved from typhus, yellow fever, and
malaria by DDT, both during and after the war, including the prisoners
freed from concentration camps. According to Indian medical
authorities, control of malaria in and of itself increased national life
expectancy from thirty-two to forty-five years. In the end, the global
eradication campaign involving DDT spraying and antimalarial drugs
saved a minimum of 100 million lives, and perhaps as many as 500
million. In less than twenty years, DDT had largely defeated malaria,
one of humanity's greatest scourges.
Carson not only ignored this, she went to
some lengths to downplay the pesticide's beneficial effects, even
completely misrepresenting successful spraying campaigns. DDT had no
redeeming qualities. And since the book appeared at a time of great
anxiety over fluoridation of water supplies, the thalidomide tragedy,
nuclear testing, and the Cuban missile crisis, the political
ramifications were immediate. Within a year, dozens of bills regulating
pesticides were pending in state legislatures. Carson herself made
several appearances before appreciative congressional committees. The
apocalyptic tone of the ensuing government scientific reports echoed
Carson, and spraying programmes that would have eradicated pests were
shut down.
Only after rigorous scientific examination in
the ensuring years were Carson's claims shown to be baseless.
Exhaustive studies proved that DDT was not a carcinogen. There was no
cancer epidemic triggered by DDT. Not even one solitary case. Even DDT's
alleged poisoning of birdlife, Carson's primary concern, was proven
false in relation to songbirds, and very doubtful as regards raptors.
But Carson's dishonest, ill-conceived book
left its deadly legacy. DDT had been ideologised and made a focus of
public fears. Spraying programmes shut down worldwide, and countries
threatened with aid and trade sanctions if they did not drop DDT. As a
result, malaria returned with a vengeance to pre-DDT levels, until the
WHO reported at the end of the 1990s that "more people are now infected
[with malaria] than at any point in history." The usual suspects like
Greenpeace had campaigned furiously against DDT, the most effective
insecticide ever formulated. It took years of behind the scenes
attempts to defeat the Green lobby that held back the means of saving
countless men, women, and children. When DDT was finally reintroduced,
the unspeakable Greenpeace turned 180 degrees, stating: "If there's
nothing else and it's going to save lives, we're all for it. Nobody's
dogmatic about it." In fact, as ever, the Socialist dogmatism they
personify had resulted in the deaths of millions.
Following his summary documentation of the Carson case in Death by Liberalism: The Fatal Outcome of Well-Meaning Liberal Policies (2011), J.R. Dunn sums up the deadly ideological pattern it established:
Without a single exception, every last
sector of the liberal establishment was tried and found wanting. The
media, the academy, the scientific community, the politicians, the
bureaucrats, all collapsed one after the other into a form of mob
hysteria that not only still prevails (global warming), but has become
part of the very essence of liberal identity and belief. American
liberals allowed themselves to be stampeded by a book, and as a result
millions suffered and died.
The crowning irony is that Rachel
Carson never called for the banning of DDT. "We must have insect
control," she said shortly before her death [from complications of
cancer in 1964]. "I do not favor turning nature over to insects, I favor
the sparing, selective and intelligent use of chemicals. It is the
indiscriminate, blanket spraying that I oppose." But in Silent Spring her
rhetoric outran her ideas, and her followers took it as a given that
this malignant threat to all that was natural must be abolished. And
for that reason, Carson takes her place beside Marx and Engels in that
small elite of writers who triggered death by their words alone.
What was the cost? The commonly quoted
number, derived from multiplying estimated yearly deaths by thirty
years, is 30 to 50 million. But not all of these victims could have been
saved. ... But if the money had been spent, if the effort had been
made, if the single useful compound had been available, then the
ancient parasite would often have been cheated of its prey, and many
who died would have lived. We have no idea how many millions that
number encompasses, but it must be very high.
Ideology as Religion
Carson's blueprint for evoking baseless fears
and catastrophic policies has either been very well understood and
cynically re-applied for personal profit (Al Gore), or completely
ignored in dealings with the Green industry (Pope Francis). "You'd look
long and hard to detect any vanishing trace of logic, rigor, or
discretion in the DDT saga," notes Dunn. Yet the Holy Father has
fervently embraced the apocalyptic tone, claims, and centralising goals
of the ideological heirs of that saga.
In thrall to self-serving alarmists touting a
non-existent "consensus" about a non-existent "crisis," he has
displayed no discernible interest in the counter-arguments and scandals
which utterly discredit environmentalism and its proponents. Rather,
casting aside all discretion, prudence and objectivity in his rush to
demonstrate his Green credentials, he has scandalised the faithful and
degraded the Faith, turning the Vatican and the papacy itself into
ideological instruments that discount rational objections to Carson-like
claims, for fear of having to account for them.
This narrow outlook has long supplanted the
Thomistic mindset that once enabled Rome to weigh up, dispassionately
and systematically, all sides of an issue or dispute. A pope with a
self-professed "reckless" streak, Francis is the antithesis of
Thomistic discipline and the orderly orthodox mind it instilled in his
papal forebears. The faithless, chaotic state of the Vatican is
testimony to how such disorderly minds are primed for Liberal ideology
rather than Catholic theology (— for the curse of "Liberal Catholicism"
rather than Catholicism, as Pius IX would put it).
One thinks immediately of the attempt to
bulldoze through a revolutionary Modernist agenda at the October 2014
Synod. The October 2015 Instrumentum Laboris was also an
ideological exercise "to try to push forward the agenda of a certain
clerical pressure group in order to change the Divine law," as Bishop
Schneider described it. To achieve this end, its drafters illicitly
listed propositions rejected by the first Synod; included spurious
interpretations of the Catechism; dissembled and lied (as in stating
there is "a common accord" in favour of Kasper's "penitential way" to
sacrilegious Communions — which recalls the global-warming "consensus"
lie); ensured key omissions and silences (on sodomy in particular); and
generally compromised Catholic Truth.
Even more blatantly, it was revealed prior to
last month's Synod that the Bergoglians appeared to be already drawing
up the post-synodal documents required to implement their
pre-determined outcome! Italian journalist Marco Tossati reported that
around thirty people, almost all of them Jesuits, with the occasional Argentinian [guess who!],
are working on the themes on the Synod, in a very reserved way, under
the coordination of Father Antonio Spadaro, the director of Civiltà Cattolica,
who spends a long time in Santa Marta, in consultation with the Pope.
... One possibility is that the 'task force' works to provide the Pope
the instruments for an eventual post-synodal document on the theme of
the Eucharist to the remarried divorced, on cohabiting [couples], and
same-sex couples.
As we noted in Part 2, the last secret 'task
force' set up by the Holy Father, just prior to the first Synod,
produced the catastrophic 'Catholic divorce'-Motu Proprio that
Francis was determined to foist on the Church; not even consulting the
CDF in the process. Speaking of which Congregation, Cardinal Müller,
too, frames the narrow, this-worldly perspective of those pushing
heretical synodical agendas (like Communion for the divorced-remarried)
in stark ideological terms, recently stating:
In view of so much talk about dialogue and its long processes, one cannot overlook in reality an ideological constrictedness or crampedness.
The goal of such an ideology is to enforce at least a change of
practice, even if it damages truth and the unity of the Church.
Always the first casualties of ideology, a
curia boasting enough 'gay' ideologues to turn Family Synods into Sodomy
Sin-Nods is hardly bothered by truth and unity! Long before Francis
brought in his unspeakably arrogant crew (see "Iron Fist," Aug-Sept
2015), "truth" and "unity" had become elastic and expendable; empty
words spouted by Vatican organs like the dogmatically evolutionist
Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which expels and demonises advocates of
Catholic creation theology rather than debate them (— see Peter
Wilders, CO passim).
Wherever we look, Modernist ideology rooted in false 'pastoral theology' has defined the
post-conciliar Church. Just as Socialist ideology rooted in false
sociology and false biology has defined Marxist and Fascist regimes
respectively. Michael Brendan Dougherty recently reminded his readers
that "the entire Mass — the central act of Catholic worship — was
re-written according to shoddy, ideologically motivated scholarship."
Modernist jackhammers and jackboots finished the job: smashing the
altars; sacking the churches; trampling over faith, morals and piety;
crushing all Catholic opposition to the world, the flesh and the devil.
Naturally, Francis and his surrogates depict us
— defenders of Tradition and the Faith of our Fathers — as the
dangerously unyielding. narrow-minded problem! "The work of liturgical
reform has been a service to the people as a re-reading of the Gospel
from a concrete historical situation," enthuses Francis, wearing his
Lib Theol hat and portraying the Novus Ordo, unwittingly,as
the sterile construct it is. "... What is worrying, though," he adds
sombrely, "is the risk of the ideologization of the Vetus Ordo
[Traditional Mass], its exploitation."
In order to rationalise his support for
sodomy, contraception, divorce-and-remarriage, and sacrilegious
Communions, Cardinal Kasper also beats the drum about "fundamentalism"
in the Church. At the pre-Synod launch of his latest book, he again
caricatured the mentality of his "fundamentalist" (read faithful
Catholic) critics: "You take one line of the Gospel and this becomes an
ideology to support your case," he sneered.
He is wrong on both counts.
Firstly, like most of his de facto schismatic German brethren, His Lutheranised Eminence confuses his sola scriptura
view of theology with the Catholic view he has abandoned — which
cannot "take one line" of Scripture without reading it in the balanced,
authoritative light of Tradition and Magisterium.
Secondly, since ideology is essentially about
defending lies and denouncing truths, it is the arch-Modernist Walter
Kasper who fits the ideological bill. Consider his mendacious attempt
to cover his tracks at Synod I, after he told a journalist that the
African bishops "should not tell us too much what we have to do."
Having thus written off the African bishops’ concerns as somehow
peripheral to the real synod discussions, or as unworthy of serious
consideration, Kasper later tried to distance himself from his
statements, besmirching the reputation of the journalist, Edward
Pentin, by denying he ever made the comments. Mr Pentin duly produced a
voice recording of Kasper’s remarks and posted it online, thereby
achieving the very considerable feat of rendering Walter speechless.
Socialist alliance
By making papal common cause with ideological enemies of the Faith, Laudato Si has merely ratified this Modernist status quo shaped by the zeitgeist
instead of St. Thomas. Were she still alive, we can be morally certain
that Francis would have invited Rachel Carson to the Vatican along
with her Green progeny: the rogues gallery of 'progressive'/'liberal'
neo-Socialists of every stripe from whom he seeks counsel.
Whether capitalo-Socialists like American
libertarian economist Jeffrey Sachs and UN Secretary-General Bank
Ki-moon, or liberal-left Socialists like Canadian feminist Naomi Klein,
his new comrades are notorious pro-contraception, pro-abortion,
pro-population control, anti-life, anti-family figures. That Laudato Si has energised these creatures is a red flag (literally speaking).
Naomi Klein, the anti-capitalist eco-crusading author of This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate,
said the encyclical spoke to her and should inspire those who use the
Bible to defend human domination of nature and deny climate change, to
change their ways. "As a secular Jewish feminist," she admitted her
surprise at being invited to Rome in early July, where she attended a
conference organised by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and
an international alliance of 17 Catholic Development Organisations.
"People and Planet First: the Imperative to Change Course," was the
breathless conference title. "This is an alliance on a specific issue.
It's not a merger," Ms Klein assured one and all. "But when you are
faced with a crisis of this magnitude, people have to get out of their
comfort zones."
And head where, precisely? Into the post-1789
killing fields comfortably occupied by Klein and her pro-abort pals?
In fact, as detailed in Cliff Kincaid's summary report herein, for a
very long time Vatican and national 'Catholic' social
justice-development-peace agencies, like those that co-hosted the July
conference, have been merrily colluding (at our charitable expense) with
the international Marxist network that controls those killing fields:
where humanistic philanthropy at the service of death and dissolution
is dressed up as Christian charity.(7)
Global Governance
Behind all the media hype and liberal excitement generated by Laudato Si, what we find is a strictly ideological fact-free zone strewn with inconvenient and unpalatable truths. In order to "get out" of their own "comfort
zones," Naomi and her new Vatican allies would have to ruin their
love-in by actually addressing those unsavoury and unsettling
realities. Such as the fraudulent windmill subsidies that fill the
pockets of opportunists(8),
shred birdlife, ruin landscapes, and tear communities apart with
division and strife. Needless and useless, these monstrous turbines
embody the monstrous lie that wants to place nature and the control of
climate and CO2 at the centre of our lives — all under a global
authority that will certainly punish dissenters just as they are now
penalising Canadians, Americans, Australians and Europeans who refuse to
march in sodomitic lockstep.
You heard correctly. Instead of good
Christian stewardship directly related to conservationism, based not on
hysteria, media manipulation, and a huckster's morality but on an
honest, rational, and clear-eyed understanding of the natural world and
man's place in it, centralised global control of Naomi's
fact-free-zone-cum-money-trough is peddled instead. Amid its hectoring
eco-rebukes, Laudato Si repeatedly pushes this revolutionary goal of the New Totalitarians; the fulcrum of their New World Order:
People may well have a growing
ecological sensitivity but it has not succeeded in changing their
harmful habits of consumption. A simple example is the increasing use
and power of air-conditioning. [#55] ... All of this shows the urgent
need for us to move forward in a bold cultural revolution. [#114] [...] there is an urgent need of a true world political authority [#175], ... empowered to impose penalties for damage inflicted on the environment. [#214]
The totalising call is reinforced several
times as Francis seeks "an agreement on systems of governance for the
whole range of so-called ‘global commons’" (#174); recommends
"think[ing] of one world with a common plan" (#164); promotes "a global
consensus … for confronting the deeper problems, which cannot be
resolved by unilateral actions on the part of individual countries"
(#164); and calls for "stronger and more efficiently organized
international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly
by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose
sanctions" (#175).
Empowering creepy crackpots
It obviously does not bother the Holy Father
that the sort of "functionaries" routinely "empowered to impose
sanctions" are anti-Christian social engineers like Hillary Clinton. At
an April 2015 summit, she typically declared that "Laws have to be
backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs... have to be changed." Lenin himself could not have been clearer.
Certainly, Al Gore and Jeffrey Sachs would be
delighted to oversee all these empowered functionaries. "We must all
become partners in a bold effort to... make the rescue of the environment the central organising principle for civilisation," declared
the messianic Gore in 1992. To that globalist end, Sachs champions a
"global tax" that would doubtless require a large army of well-paid
functionaries to administer.
And then there is the atheist
neo-totalitarian Hans Joachim Schellnhuber. Labelled "a doomsday
crackpot who calls himself a physicist" (by Czech physicist Lubos
Motl), this abortion and contraceptive-abortifacient advocate helped
Francis shape and launch his recyclical. Simply put, globalists don't
come more extreme, better connected, or scarier than Herr Schellnhuber.
According to First Things:
The sole scientist participating in the unveiling of Laudato Si,
Schellnhuber is a member of the Club of Rome, an international clique
of Malthusian alarmists. (Obama’s advisor John Holdren is a former
member.) Acolyte of [nature goddess] Gaia and a darling of George
Soros, Schellnhuber is a zealous promoter of the theory of man-made
climate change and advocate of population control.
He has lobbied for an Earth
Constitution to replace national constitutions and the UN Charter. He
seeks creation of a Global Council, and establishment of a Planetary
Court. This last would be a transnational legal body with enforcement
powers on environmental and population issues. Everywhere. In short, ...
Schellnhuber is the Vatican’s advance man for bureaucratic tyranny on a
global scale. His appointment is as contradictory as it is ominous.
The “global regulatory frameworks” desired by Laudato Si will crush orthodoxy without scruple when it suits.
Oh, and the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
has welcomed the Darwinian Schellnhuber into its evolutionist ranks for
good measure; an appointment that only makes sense, writes First Things,
"if we ask ourselves an unwelcome question: Is the Academy risking —
if not engaged in—guerilla war against the pro-life movement?"
Danneels, Baldisseri, Sachs, Bank Ki-moon,
Schellnhuber... it's as if Bond supervillains have been handed the keys
to the Vatican, and SPECTRE is running the show! When the spooky
background to Laudato Si is finally revealed, and it transpires
that Schellnhuber wore an eyepatch and stroked a white cat (with a
diamond collar) as he cast his good eye over each draft, I for one
won't flinch.
Viva la Revolución!
Just in case we didn't get the message,
shortly after releasing his Green manifesto, Francis embarked on his
notorious Latin American tour. There he fomented social revolution,
delivering long and impassioned speeches against capitalism and private
property to the applause of Marxist revolutionary leaders and followers
of Liberation Theology and the Marxist "Popular Movements" — a number
of whom he had already invited to the Vatican, as Prince Bertrand of
Orleans-Braganza detailed in our recent editions.
The jacket worn in the Pope's presence by
Bolivia’s President Evo Morales, bearing a large picture of
blood-thirsty "Che" Guevara, captured the spirit of a tour that surely
had Pius XI on his knees: begging Almighty God to ignore this papal
spitting on his mighty encyclical Divini Redemptoris (On Atheistic Communism).
In a fiery speech on 9 July 2015 at the
Second World Meeting of Popular Movements in Santa Cruz de la Sierra in
Bolivia, Francis placed the goals of their socio-economic revolution
together with those of his own ecological revolution, giving primacy to
the latter, "perhaps the most important thing we should take up today."
Mutual backslapping followed. "Our faith is revolutionary," cried
Comrade Francis before these revolutionary shock troops. "I have carried
you in my heart." Comrade Juan (Pedro Stedile) responded: "Chavez
died and Fidel is sick. Francis has taken up that leadership role and is
doing everything right."
Quite the contrary. As usual he has
everything upside down and inside out. For Socialism in Bolivia (as in
communist Cuba and Venezuela) has been and continues to be an economic
system that intrinsically produces poverty, class struggle and social
conflict. But again, Francis is unmoved. He conveyed his indifference
to this Communist legacy by accepting totally unacceptable gifts from
President Morales — including the Luis Espinal Award in memory of a
revolutionary priest murdered in 1970. Decrying the papal acquiescence
as "a symbolic tragic foreshadowing of the direction being taken by
Francis’ pontificate in the political and social spheres," a Spanish
commentator duly described the objects of his shock and dismay:
This medal contains a blasphemous depiction of Jesus Christ on a hammer and sickle, symbols of Communism. Francis was also given a replica of the original wood-carved [hammer-and-sickle] crucifix made by the revolutionary priest.
Thrusting a fistful of salt into Catholic
wounds, Francis did not hesitate to wear the hideous medallion around
his neck. He then decided to leave the abomination at the feet of the
statue of Our Lady of Copacabana, Patroness of Bolivia! After neocons
rushed online to explain away the indefensible papal behaviour,
claiming the Pope was not happy about being ambushed by Morales, it
later transpired that Francis was not the least offended by the
blasphemous objects, nor ashamed of their clerical creator. "Espinal
was an enthusiast of this Marxist analysis of the reality, but also of
theology using Marxism," he breezily informed journalists on the way
back to Rome. "From this, he came up with this work." A work so
gratifying he took the Communist 'crucifix' home ("It's travelling with
me," he assured the press corps.)
What to say in response to this monumental
scandal? On the very day that Francis happily accepted his Communist
obscenity, the Communist government of Shanghai was mandating that
Catholic priests and nuns of the diocese undergo "re-education" classes
on the central theme of the National Congress of the Communist Party.
Unlike the hundreds of millions it has done to death over the decades,
the Communist monster is far from dead and buried. It continues to
destroy and devour everything in its path. Righteously outraged by the
desecration of the holy symbol of Our Blessed Lord's bitter Passion and
Death, and on behalf of Marxist victims past and present, Dr. Claude
Newbury wrote:
Could one imagine an image of a smiling
Pius VII receiving a "crucifix" on a small guillotine? Or a smiling
Pius XII receiving a "crucifix" on a Swastika? And yet... as horrendous
as both the Terreur and the Nazis were, neither reached the absolute
numbers of victims (ongoing as we speak, with Catholics in their
dungeons as we speak) of the doctrine of the Hammer and Sickle.
Communism, the greatest killer of Christians of all ages, defiles the
Sacred Image of Our Lord and the memory of so many martyrs. And now
they want to erase even this in the name of "dialogue"!... The image
[of Francis receiving his 'award'] will forever remain, for all
posterity, the defining image of this pontificate.
There is much more besides that could be
vehemently added about the Pope's subversive posturing in Latin America.
But it left his many cheerleaders cock-a-hoop. "An aggressive Pope
Francis is on a mission to transform the mutant ideology of today’s
capitalist world with its rampant profits-centered climate-science
denialism," wrote economist and former investment banker Paul B.
Farrell. "Pope Francis is not just leading a 'Second American
Revolution,' he is rallying people across the Earth, middle class as
well as poor, inciting billions to rise up in a global economic
revolution, one that could suddenly sweep the planet, like the 1789
French storming the Bastille." He went on:
Yes folks, Pope Francis is a
revolutionary destined to end up in the history books right up there
with Lenin and Marx, Mao and Castro. He is obviously inciting
revolution, wants civil disobedience and political insurrection, he is
egging the poor into rebellion against a vastly outnumbered rich.
In fact, Francis has become one of the
world’s great revolutionary leaders. He not only is inciting an
uprising of the masses against wealthy capitalist billionaires, he’s out
in front of the emerging global revolution, encouraging the masses,
shouting battle cries, a leader in the tradition of Washington.
... His is an aggressive call to arms, a
call for a global revolution attacking today’s out-of-control,
consumer-driven “mutant capitalism,” a call to replace capitalism with a
new economic socialism giving the poor “sacred rights” on par with the
superrich. [www.marketwatch.com, 21/7/15]
A fair summary of the Pope's mindset and
ambition. But so much humanistic blather. It was renowned Italian
journalist Antonio Socci's summation that cut to the supernatural
chase:
Bergoglio’s trip to South America helps
us understand, why, precisely in that once very Catholic continent, the
Church over the last decades is in freefall, with a statistical
collapse of membership which has no equal in the world. Where priests
and bishops are syndicates and demagogues, people feel no attraction
for the faith. If the discourses of the ecclesiastics resemble those of
Evo Morales – why continue going to church? It is for this reason,
that the religious question and the attraction for the supernatural is
conveyed through other forms of religiosity and many, many people are
abandoning the Catholic Church.
Bergoglio is now applying this ruinous
recipe, already experimented in Latin America, also to the Universal
Church. In order to produce the same disasters.
One-World Church
Little wonder that bemused pro-abort Naomi
Klein, who served as both a panellist during the Vatican climate
conference and a speaker at the major press conference organised by the
Holy See Press Office, chose to title a subsequent piece about her
Roman adventure, "A Radical Vatican?". The superfluous question mark
aside, her New Yorker article was "noteworthy not only as an example of how secular figures that the Vatican itself considers as allies are treating the encyclical, as an epochal break from Catholic tradition," commented Rorate Caeli, "but also for its passages about the theological intentions behind the encyclical."
Exhibit A in this regard was Father Sean
McDonagh, an administrator of Ireland's notorious Association of
'Catholic' Priests. According to Rorate Caeli, the ACP's
website trumpeted that Fr McDonagh was "one of the chief advisors to
the Vatican in the composition of the encylical." While Vatican Radio
"not only acknowledges that he was one of the theologians consulted for
the encyclical, but also chose to interview him about its importance."
Ms Klein introduced him to her readership by way of a fundamental
query: "Once an official Papal teaching challenges something as central
as human dominion over the earth, is it really possible to control
what will happen next?" She went on:
This point is made forcefully by the
Irish Catholic priest and theologian Seán McDonagh, who was part of the
drafting process for the encyclical. His voice booming from the
audience, he urges us not to hide from the fact that the love of nature
embedded in the encyclical represents a profound and radical shift
from traditional Catholicism. “We are moving to a new theology,” he declares.
To prove it, he translates a Latin
prayer that was once commonly recited after communion during the season
of advent. “Teach us to despise the things of the earth and to love
the things of heaven.” Overcoming centuries of loathing the corporeal
world is no small task, and, McDonagh argues, it serves little purpose
to downplay the work ahead.
The real work ahead for a future Catholic
pontiff, of course, is the Augean task of hosing down the Church to
flush out prelates in whose image and likeness self-loathing
pseudo-Catholics like Fr McDonagh are formed. Such as our own
Archbishop Nichols. Stirring the anti-Catholic pot just before the
Synod, His disGrace could barely contain his glee as he fed the English
press a summary of responses to the latest episcopal 'survey' on
marriage and family life: a report in which the usual unrepentant
malcontents and apostates (for whom these 'surveys' are designed)
denounced the Church as "bigoted", "misogynistic", "controlling"
"judgmental", "outdated," "pharisaical," and much else besides.
Until such time as a Crisis Pope expunges all
the McDonaghs and Nichols', they will continue to make hay under a
full-blown Modernist pontiff steaming onwards and downwards: not only
to the political goal of "the great movement of apostasy being
organised in every country," wrote St. Pius X a century ago, but also
towards its complementary religious objective:
a One-World Church which shall have
neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb
for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human
dignity, would bring back to the world... the reign of legalized
cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak....
What a precise depiction of the current
pontificate! Its "Liberal Catholic" essence, corrupting effects, and
determination to realise Pius X's prophesy by dovetailing with the
syncretic United Religions. As documented in our May edition, although
the hyper-ecumenised Vatican has been involved in this United Nations
(read NWO) project for many years, former Israeli President Shimon
Peres views Pope Francis as the man to consummate the collaboration
because "he returned religion into [sic] a spirit rather than an organisation, a faith more than a church."
Could there be a more damning
description of a pontiff? Or, since it is true, a whiter flag of
surrender to the UN's syncretic agenda? Yet the humble, merciful Pope
who just keeps on giving (scandal) also keeps confirming the Peres
assessment. Consider this pan-Christian, pan-theistic passage from Laudato Si [#222]:
Christian spirituality proposes an
alternative understanding of the quality of life, and encourages a
prophetic and contemplative lifestyle, one capable of deep enjoyment
free of the obsession with consumption. We need to take up an ancient lesson, found in different religious traditions and also in the Bible.
The Dalai Lama has said as much! Nary a mention of the only "ancient lesson" that counts: namely, that not "different religious traditions" but only the one true religion — Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman — can provide authentic "spirituality" that informs a genuinely "prophetic and contemplative lifestyle." Full stop.
Masonic gameplan
Father Lombardi tells us that the Holy Father
views his collaboration with "initiatives" geared to the UN's
religious project as "the opening of a door." How about a masonic
portal!
As noted earlier, in 1964 Freemason Yves
Marsaudon revealed what lay on the other side of that 'door': nothing
less than a liberal/ecumenical tidal wave that would sweep away all
doctrinal and moral absolutes ("spiritual barriers that divide the
world"), and every last trace of Catholic dogma that defines and guards
them. Fifty years on, with traditional Catholicism barely treading
water after the deluge, a sympathetic Pope has surfed in on Marsaudon's
predicted "rising flood of ecumenism and liberalism," to turbo-charge
their syncretic dreams with Laudato Si. The next stage is the masonic endgame described in this prophetic statement by Freemason Eliph Levi in 1862:
A day will come when the pope, inspired
by the Holy Spirit will declare that all the excommunications are
lifted and all the anathemas are retracted, when all the Christians
will be united within the Church, when the Jews and Moslems will be
blessed and called back to her ... she will permit all sects to
approach her by degrees and will embrace all mankind in the communion
of her love and prayers. Then, Protestants will no longer exist.
Against what will they be able to protest? The sovereign pontiff will
then be truly king of the religious world, and he will do whatever he
wishes with all the nations of the earth.
Honorary king of the United Religions?
Perhaps. But far from lording it over the Lords of the Earth, this
syncretic anti-pope will do whatever the Antichrist and his False
Prophet wish him to do. As masonic banners seen by St.
Maximilian Kolbe proclaimed at a 1917 bicentennial celebration of
Freemasonry in St. Peter's Square: "Satan Must Reign in the Vatican.
The Pope Will Be His Slave." That doubtless remains the objective of
the inner-sanctum of the Lodge that worships the satanic trinity
JAH-BUL-ON.
When Sister Lucia exclaimed in her letter to Cardinal Caffarra (during the reign of John Paul II) that "The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family!", papal
complicity with the Enemy in that battle would have seemed
preposterous. Yet documents from the Alta Vendita Lodge setting out
their plans to that masonic end were public knowledge sixty years before the Masons paraded their satanic banner in Rome.
They had been obtained by the Vatican and published by Cardinal Jacques Crétineau-Jolie in his book, The Roman Church facing the Revolution
(1859). We have run lengthy extracts from these documents in past
editions (cf. April 2014). The Alta Vendita openly declared that its
"ultimate end is that of Voltaire and of the French Revolution — the final destruction forever of Catholicism, and even of the Christian idea."
The strategy they detail to bring this about did not involve placing a
Freemason on the throne of Peter, however. The plan was to gain
control of everything around the pope and elect one sympathetic to
them.(9)
With the Barque of Peter stripped down,
remodelled, refitted, and a revolutionary wind in its sails, we are not
so very far away from that Endtime reckoning: the legalistic
persecution and oppression forewarned by Pius X.
Green 'theology'
Redolent of Teilhardian pantheism, Laudato Si is a major leap into that pagan darkness, as captured in Naomi Wolfe's encounter with the paganised Fr McDonagh:
McDonagh points out that it’s not just
Latin Americans who figured out how to reconcile a Christian God with a
mystical Earth. The Irish Celtic tradition also managed to maintain a
sense of "divine in the natural world. Water sources had a divinity
about them. Trees had a divinity to them." But, in much of the rest of
the Catholic world, all of this was wiped out. "We are presenting
things as if there is continuity, but there wasn’t continuity. That
theology was functionally lost."
As for McDonagh, he is thrilled with
the encyclical, although he wishes it had gone even further in
challenging the idea that the earth was created as a gift to humans. How
could that be so, when we know it was here billions of years before we
arrived?
I ask how the Bible could survive this
many fundamental challenges — doesn’t it all fall apart at some point?
He shrugs, telling me that scripture is ever evolving, and should be
interpreted in historical context. If Genesis needs a prequel, that’s
not such a big deal. Indeed, I get the distinct sense that he’d be
happy to be part of the drafting committee.
Comrades Mikhail and Al are on the same page:
equally happy to join comrades Naomi and Sean in Jorge's "bold
revolution" speeding towards pagan Utopia: a Socialist One-World
Government served by a Pantheistic One-World Church.
"Nature is my God," declares Gorbachev. While
Gore echoes the Pope's call to take on board "different religious
traditions," himself pontificating that "[M]onotheism was once... a
profoundly empowering idea. ... [but] 'empowerment' must now be
obtained by consulting 'the wisdom instilled by all faiths'."
'Empowered' by this 'wisdom,' Mr Gore deducts
that the Bible inveighs against global warming and the internal
combustion engine, but has nothing of any relevance to say on the
matter of trafficking in baby parts or sucking a baby's brains out.
Since they clearly developed their bogus 'theology' from the same Green
School of Deconstruction, Gore would happily join Fr McDonagh in that
Green re-write of Genesis. Anne Coulter writes that
Gore claims the story of Cain and Abel
is a parable about the dangers of pollution. Not original sin, not
murder, not envy; pollution. "Indeed," he writes in his magnum opus, Earth in the Balance, "the
first instance of 'pollution' in the Bible occurs when Cain slays
Abel." According to Gore, God was hopping mad about Cain polluting.
Cain had "defiled the ground" with Abel's messy blood. Murder is one
thing, but polluting with Abel's blood was what really got God mad.
When pressed to expand upon this
singular interpretation of the Cain and Abel story, Gore explained that
God's original rebuff of Cain's offering of the fruit of the ground
(which set off Cain's murderous jealousy — and the first recorded case
of pollution) was simply "a metaphorical reference to the move from a
herding to an agricultural economy."
Fifteen years ago, when Coulter penned this,
we used to laugh about it. Suddenly it's not funny. Especially when
priests and seminarians commonly espouse the same aggressively
anti-Christian theological and scriptural absurdities — dangerous absurdities that Laudato Si will only foster in spades.
Ideological path of misery and death
Sadly, like Mr Gore, the Holy Father, too, is
not averse to manipulating Scripture for his own ends. The writings
of the saints are also abused. Consider his flagrant misrepresentation
of St. Matthew (see CO, April 2014, p.66), and egregious "falsification of the spirituality of St. Francis of Assisi" in Laudato Si (see
James Larson herein). It is a shamefully deceitful bond to share with a
man such as Gore. Yet like the hypocritical streak he shares with
Obama, it makes tragic sense.
Since mendacity and dissembling are hallmarks
of Modernism, and ideology is founded on and sustained by lies, the
attraction of an über-Modernist pontiff to the siren call of Green
ideology is only to be expected. After all, lies don't come any bigger
than those espoused by eco-ideologues. Indeed, though excruciating to
watch, the Bergoglian embrace of the broader zeitgeist in such emphatic public fashion should not surprise us either.
Moreover, it is pointless for neocons to
argue that Francis is no more complicit than his predecessor, who, they
insist, only ever desired to bring the post-1789 era to heel, by
imbuing its tenets with Catholic meaning. ... That worked out well
didn't it!
In fact, that catastrophic attempt to appease
the voracious Revolutionary beast with tolerance and dialogue has only
hastened the descent to a naturalistic social gospel at the service of
limitless liberté, egalité et fraternité. Under cover of
'social justice', this phony and vain attempt to make everyone and
everything free and equal is just a perennial fig leaf for terrible
people to seize power. In the event, whether they be Jacobins,
Communists, Maoists or Modernists, they all cause the innocent untold
suffering. Not least innocent children who carry lifelong wounds from
divorce, and will suffer in ever greater numbers if Modernists succeed
in undermining the indissolubility of marriage.
The liberal-left Naomi Klein would (not unreasonably) argue that the laissez-faire
economics of the libertarian-right — personified by Jeffrey Sachs
and his mentor Milton Friedman — has proved even more destructive. But
libertarian Friederich Hayek was right when he insisted that the
attempt at 'social justice' causes more misery than almost any other
factor in human life.
J.R. Dunn agrees, not least where social justice and environmentalism collide. In his forensic Death by Liberalism, he
writes that "The Green movement accomplishes little for the
environment or its animal denizens.... It does nothing to protect human
beings — environmentalism is almost certain to have cost far more lives
than it has saved. Its actual agenda is almost completely divorced
from its public rhetoric."
This deadly trajectory is of no interest to
Catholic 'social justice' organisations mesmerised, corrupted, and
consumed by utopian rhetoric. They took their lead, however, from
hireling shepherds who found the overriding supernatural mission of the
Church — the salvation of souls —too embarrassing to preach to
a secular world. As hirelings do, they soon abandoned the flock. But
also the secular sheeple: the hapless unchurched, who view themselves
as "sophisticated," "free," "tolerant, and "democratic." How will they
ever come to recognise and escape their ideological bind — their daily
walk in PC-lockstep with those who would mislead, manipulate, rob,
control, and kill them and their unborn children — when the God-given
bulwark against all ideologies is now Herself led by a Pope in thrall
to Green ideologues?
The Catholic way: beyond plutocracy and socialism
Only the wantonly blind failed to see it
coming in a rush. At the beginning of his pontificate Pope Francis set
out his Modernist stall when he proclaimed that the Church had locked
itself up in "small things, in small-minded rules." It must find a new
balance between upholding rules and demonstrating mercy, he warned,
"otherwise even the moral edifice of the Church is likely to fall like a
house of cards...."
The sprawling synodical "process" and plans
to devolve ever more power to faithless local hierarchies is his way of
circumventing those not-so-small "rules" which he knows to be immutable — dogmas only an anti-pope can overturn.
The masonic movers and shakers of the French
Revolution swore to overturn Throne and Altar upon the tomb of Jacques
deMolay. When Louis XVI was executed, half the work was done.
Thereafter they directed all their efforts against the papacy. It proved
an altogether tougher nut to crack. But with "the Revolution of
John XXIII," as Yves Marsaudon and the Brotherhood boasted, the
principles "at the core" of their Lodges had finally "spread in a
truly magnificent manner right under the Dome of St. Peter's."
The longstanding Alta Vendita strategy has
now fructified in the person of Francis: a syncretic appeaser
manoeuvred into place by the unspeakable Danneels; who accepts honorary
membership of the Rotarians (the 'White Masons') as happily as he
receives a Communist 'crucifix'; who blithely fosters sin (and
temptation to sin) by publicly entertaining unrepentant clerical
sodomites and homosexual 'couples' (— like the mentally ill
'transexual' woman, who calls herself "Diego," and her female 'fiancée'
with whom he personally met and was photographed on 24 January 2015,
no penitential or psychiatric strings attached).
If these kinds of workaday social gospel scandals parade the Holy Father's abandonment of true mercy, compassion and toleration, it is because he has abandoned the true way of the Gospel of Christ; the Catholic way.
A malformed and disoriented Modernist who has
lost his moral compass, he cannot find that famous "third way" about
which liberals speak but have no clear idea: the way between capitalism
and socialism, or rather beyond them. The principle of that "third
way," the Abbé de Nantes once wrote:
is to live for God, in contempt of
money. Its long term work is to create religious, political and
ecological institutions capable of restoring social justice and
perfecting it through Christian charity without in any way yielding to
the "institutional violence" of masonic plutocracy on the one hand or
to the "insurrectional violence" of socialism or communism on the
other.
Capitalo-socialist path of endless revolution
With his leap into Green ideology, Pope Francis has yielded to both factions!
Hailing the "left" and hammering the "right," yet actually pandering
to both secular extremes, when he is not channelling Chavez and Castro,
Francis is radiating the syncretic spirit of Tony Blair.
A Fabian Socialist(10)(of the same "gradualist" school as Francis), Blair constantly invoked an amorphous "third way," politically and religiously.
On 3 April 2008 in Westminster cathedral, he said that he wanted his
newly established Faith Foundation to organise a global campaign to
mobilise young people, across religious divides, to work together to
help achieve the UN Millenium Development Goals. Not only does that
sound like a passage from Laudato Si, the campaign was to be
called "Faith and Globalisation" — a far more accurate title for the
Holy Father's toxic mix of NWO ideology and generic 'spirituality.'
(Indeed, was Fides et Globalisation Hans 'Blofeld'
Schellnhuber's draft title for the recyclical? And did he hurl his cat
across the room, and electrocute cardinals, when he didn't get his
way?I think we should be told.)
While playing both sides, however, the Holy
Father seems oblivious to the well-documented fact that, ultimately,
overrall control rests with the New World Order octopus. Through its
interlocking governmental, banking and financial tentacles, it always
backs both sides in any faction/government/movement/revolution.
Everything is viewed as a potential cash cow by the same amoral WASP and
Jewish elites who bankrolled Lenin's Bolsheviks and made vast amounts
of money from their victory, as the blood flowed relentlessly, and the
body count rose relentlessly. The Green scam is just another
money-making/power-grab opportunity for these godless creatures — still
with us and more virulent than ever, having emerged unscathed and
enriched from the financial meltdown they oversaw.(11)
Meantime, as convergence with the NWO acquires new meaning under Francis, the late Abbé's lament lament still holds:
the Church is continuing her mediocre
path, confounded with all the humanitarian organisations cluttering up
the planet, a capitalo-socialist path [embodied in Sachs and Klein]
alternating from one country to another, and from one revolution to
another, between the idolatry of Money, the cult of the established
order and the frenzy of consumerism on one hand, and the idolatry of
the State, the exaltation of the masses and the frenzy of collectivism
on the other.
Blind hearts: darkened minds
Unlike Francis, his Liberal Catholic
entourage, and their secular soulmates, Blessed Pius IX and Saint Pius X
— those 'reactionary' papal throwbacks to the dreaded Syllabus and Pascendi —
preferred to trace the Church’s path along the straight line of the
pure Gospel, as far removed from an enslaving and inhuman so-called
'right' as from a so-called humanist and justice-loving 'left.' Pius IX
warned time and again that Liberal Catholicism would deviate from that
line and make lethal common cause, 'left' and 'right':
Atheism in legislation, indifference in
matters of religion, and the pernicious maxims which go under the name
of Liberal Catholicism are the true causes of the destruction of
states; they have been the ruin of France. ... I have always condemned
Liberal Catholicism, and I will condemn it again forty times over if it
be necessary."
And we still condemn it! Repeatedly. With the
same persevering and vigorous charity as the great pontiff. And we
insist that his current successor's wild popularity is explained
precisely because he embodies that wretched curse.
Disillusioned Evangelical Albert Mohler concurs. "Evidently you can
like Pope Francis, because he doesn’t particularly represent any kind
of defense of those teachings that cause such offense," he says. In
Francis, Mohler sees a Liberal Catholic par excellence: exactly the type of ideological religious leadership the secular media and the theological left are longing for:
An example of leadership that does not
define the issues, an example of leadership that moves from theology to
piety, an example of leadership that doesn’t bring up the awkward
questions and doesn’t lean into the hard issues where the truth has to
be defined and defended.
Like the papal address to Congress, Laudato Si is
that non-leadership on steroids. Upon its release, Judie Brown of
American Life League voiced the incredulity of faithful Catholics:
[There are] so many people being denied
proper care, and other people are being killed at the hands of
abortionists and those who perform euthanasia, and we've got all sorts
of devastation going on in the human family. Should we really be
looking at what's going on with endangered species of animals? Souls
are going to hell every day because they are violating moral principles
and are offending God in many and varied ways that are substantive and
are [contrary] to the laws of God, the Ten Commandments. This
encyclical flies in the face of all of that.
Before this rudderless Church, Pat Buchanan
asks: "Having emerged victorious in the 70-year ideological struggle
against one of the greatest enemies that mankind has ever known,
Marxism-Leninism, are the United States and the Catholic Church heading
for the same desuetude and disintegration?"
Meanwhile, at the Synod, Polish Archbishop Gradecki and some members of his small discussion group (Circulus Italicus) are
also facing the wicked reality with clear eyes. In his daily blog of
events, His Grace revealed that during their Morning Session of 8
October, there were Synod Fathers in Italicus A who were concerned that the spirit of masonic influence had infected sections of the Instrumentum Laboris:
Dialogue on human rights is the point of view of the illuminati
of the 19th century; where is the theology? Where are the Rights of
God? Instead of the work of creation, we have talk about ecology.
These concerns and fears speak for all Catholics with a semblance of faith and sanity. But not for the Vicar of Christ. And there is the nub and gravity of our unprecedented crisis. For while we see lost souls, disintegration, tumbrils and the guillotine, he sees unprecedented health and stability!
"I dare say that the Church has never been so
well as it is today," Francis exclaimed to Roman clergy gathered at
the Lateran basilica on 16 September 2013. "The Church is not
collapsing I am sure of it, I am sure of it!" Thus, in a state of
denial and unwilling to concede the daily disintegration, he allows
chaos to reign swith a knowing smile, while dismissing calls for
orthodoxy and order.
On the one hand, the day after receiving a
letter of protest signed by 13 concerned cardinals — who among other
things objected to a synodal process "designed to facilitate
predetermined results on important disputed questions" — Francis dressed
down the signatories: by way of exhorting the Synod Fathers "not to
give in to the conspiracy hermeneutic, which is sociologically weak and
spiritually unhelpful."
On the other, there is no papal rebuke of
prelates like Bishop Bode, Germany’s Synod delegate, who pushes 'gay
blessings,' while calling the Church to see not just the "deficiencies"
but the "strengths" of sodomites. And there is no rebuke because the
Pope clearly does not view calls to sanction mortal sin as
conspiratorial or "sociologically weak and spiritually unhelpful."
That is why the Swiss bishops, during their
31 August Study Day in Berne, felt free to determine and publicise that
the Church should come to a "recognition and appreciation of
relationships which no longer correspond to the old-fashioned ideal
which comes from another period of time, for example remarried
divorcees or same-sex partnerships." It is why, on 16 September, the
German Bishops’ website did not hesitate to feature an interview in
which a German historian lauded the Pill as the "decisive revolution"
in liberating women, labelled the Church’s teaching on the sinfulness
of homosexuality, masturbation and contraception as "medieval," and
baldly stated that "one cannot describe homosexuality as unnatural." It
also accounts for why L’Osservatore Romano has embraced
degenerate popular culture. And why the German website of Vatican Radio
featured a photo of homosexuals kissing under a rainbow flag.
This kind of sodomitic guerilla warfare is
going on every day of the week all over the West. The Church is
morphing into a saltless, servile, dissolute handmaiden of the rapidly
emerging New World Order and its masonic One-World Church. So why is the
Vicar of Christ certain that there is not the slightest cause for
concern? The elementary answer is the spiritual blindness and
consequent eclipse of faith and reason with which God has cursed all
'Liberal Catholics,' just as He struck the Jews:
Having their understanding darkened,
being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in
them, because of the blindness of their hearts. [Eph. 4:18]
Just consider that after his June 2014
inter-faith prayer meeting with Presidents Peres and Abbas, and
Ecumenical Partriarch Bartholomew I — on Pentecost Sunday, in a Vatican
garden stripped bare of all religious symbols for the occasion — he
told Fr Lombardi that he considers these kinds of (syncretic NWO)
initiatives as the way "to develop and go forward." Spiritually
blinded, Francis equates total 'collapse' with 'progress.' It is that
simple, and that Orwellian.
What has become of the papacy?
Surveying all this as he did the activities and views of the Sillon,
St. Pius X would doubtless ask: 'What has become of the Catholicism of
the hierarchy? Of the papacy?' Rhetorical questions we ponder every
day. With even greater urgency now that grave doubts have been raised
about the validity of the Bergoglian pontificate in light of the
conniving St. Gallen "mafia club."
Indeed, Cardinal Daneels' revelation about
that Liberal Catholic cabal recalled the late great Father Vincent
Miceli's warning of the presence of mini-Antichrists within the Church,
working as demolition squads with animus delendi — the desire
to destroy — the Mystical Body of Christ. With their preferred
candidate finally set in place — as a mere Bishop of Rome, eschewing
all symbols of supreme and universal papal authority and power — the
pure 'Gospel revolution' (apostolic, charitable, and supernatural)
immediately transfigured into one more recycled revolt of the "post-1789
era" (always political and social, forever leaving death and
dissolution in their wake).
In the end, as blind and deluded about the
state of the world as he is about the Church, Francis the Great
Revolutionary Reformer simply lacks the faith and understanding to
wrest the nations from an unjust and corrupting capitalism without at
the same time throwing them into an iron-fisted and persecuting
socialism. He and his backers have lost their way: the way of Jesus Christ; the way of the Church; the way of mankind’s salvation. The
path of St Vincent de Paul, not Leonardo Boff, and other faithless,
unrepentant Liberation 'Theologians' Francis has rehabilitated.
It all leaves us in a devilish bind. But let us take heart from Professor John Rao's reminder that
History is filled with popes who are
good and bad, intelligent and mentally challenged, efficient and
hopelessly incompetent, pastorally calamitous and pastorally fruitful.
It was perhaps inevitable that, given the preferential option for
pluralism adopted by a "pastoral" Council, the Church would be forced
to endure the reign of a wilful pope ready to impose his own crochets
upon the faithful or voluntarily promote those of others he admires.
Proof after proof of that wilfulness is offered to us every day.
All the more reason to pray everyday for the Holy Father: for his conversion, and our speedy deliverance from his wilful revolutionary rule.
FOOTNOTES:
(1) Marco Tossati and Edward Pentin reported Daneels' comments on 24 September, in La Stampa and The National Catholic Register respectively. Austin Ivereigh has also documented the machinations of the cabal in The Great Reformer, his Modernist hagiography of Jorge Bergoglio. (In Universi Dominici Gregis, John
Paul II reiteratedthat the penalty for vote canvassing in papal
elections is excommunication. Accordingly, both Danneels' biographers
and Mr Ivereigh quickly spun the "mafia" out of trouble by insisting
their agitating and conniving was nothing out of the ordinary. But
justice is God's. We can only pray that after the Holy Spirit purifies
the hierarchy of its current crop of self-serving Modernist hypocrites,
liars and sexual degenerates, a future Catholic pontiff will address
the facts, and posthumously excommunicate the lot of them.
(2)
One photo of Danneels shaking hands with the Grand Master of the Grand
Orient of Belgium also shows him holding in his other hand two books,
titled: Become a Freemason at the Grand Orient of Belgium, and The Treasures of the Temple.
(3)
In another Jewish encounter: during a visit to the Vatican by Israeli
President Reuven Rivlin in early September, Rivlin's personal secretary
Rivkah – an Orthodox-Jewish woman – explained to the Pope that for
religious reasons she could not shake his hand, nor could she bow down
since he was wearing a cross. The photo of the meeting, proudly
displayed above derisive anti-Catholic comments and insults on an
Israeli website, shows Francis covering his cross with his hand as he
bowed to her.
(4)
It seems that Marxism was not all that Obama learnt from his notorious
childhood mentor Frank Marshall Davis. A card-carrying Communist,
Davis was also a homo-paedophile who in all probability molested Obama,
setting him on the path to his later renowned drug use and degenerate
behaviour, to include membership of depraved groups such as the "Down
Low Club." A matchmaking service for 'gay' married black professionals
at Obama's "Black Liberation Theology" church, three DLC members were
murdered in quick succession in November and December 2007, including
choir director Donald Young, Obama's reputed lover, who was found
riddled with bullets on Christmas Eve in an assassination-style slaying
at the height of the 2007 Democratic presidential primary (presumably
to protect Obama from embarrassing revelations). In the mid-1990s,
Obama also began frequenting "Man's Country," one of uptown Chicago's
"grand old bathhouses" that "appears to be a 'one stop shopping' center
for gay men," the Wayne Madsen Report documented on 24 May 2010. "The
club’s website advertises steam rooms, 'fantasy rooms,' bed rooms, male
strippers, adult movies, and lockers." As with the Clintons, a
mainstream media ever protective of Obama has ensured that this damning
history, and so much more besides, remains little known.
(5)
Historian Paul Johnson noted that the "rights of nature" have figured
on the agenda of both the radical left and the radical right "for at
least a century, and have been accompanied by far-reaching plans to
reconstruct society in order to protect them. Hitler indeed remained a
Green in some respects throughout his life."
(6) Defending, as ever, their indefensible gravy train, the Green establishment attacked the WSJ
figure as a misrepresentation. Yet without entering into the 1%
calculation, even if we magnanimously increased it by a factor of sixty, only ideologues could present a 60-40 split as a “consensus.”
(7)
A former head of the US bishops' development and peace office even
offered researcher Michael Hichborn a bribe to cease his investigations
into the funding of Marxists. In return, Hichborn would get funding to
investigate something else.
(8)
Spain, which has supported "alternate power" programmes to a greater
extent than any other single nation, subsidises jobs in the wind
industry to the tune of $1.5 million each, amounting to $43 billion in
subsidies for power sources providing less than one per cent of
the country's requirements. In the UK, subsidies worth around £1
billion are currently paid to wind-farm operators, funded by a
surcharge on domestic energy bills.
(9)
Speaking of these masonic plans on 16 October 1917 (just three days
after the stupendous heaveny miracle at Fatima), St. Maximilian Kolbe
wrote: "Such implacable hatred for the Church and the ambassadors of
Christ on Earth is... a systematic activity stemming in the final
analysis from Freemasonry. Their decrees have been spread throughout
the world, in different guises. But with the same goal — religious
indifference and weakening of moral forces, according to their basic
principle — 'We will conquer the Catholic Church not by argumentation,
but rather with moral corruption'."
(10)
A former member of Labour's hard Left faction who knows the inside
story, renowned English commentator Peter Hitchens recently confirmed
the point we have stressed in this series apropos the Frankfurt School
and its fellow-travellers: namely, that "the real Left" works "by
stealth." Hitchen says "That is why our political media never
understood that the Blairites [the Fabians of so-called New Labour]
were in fact far more Left wing than [doctrinaire Marxist] Jeremy
Corbyn [the newly elected leader of the Labour Party]." Writing in the Mail on Sunday, he explained that "The Blair faction's ideas came from a communist magazine called Marxism Today.
The magazine, in turn, got the ideas from a clever Italian
revolutionary called Antonio Gramsci. He wanted a cultural revolution, a
Leftist takeover of schools, universities, media, police, and courts
(and of conservative political parties too). That is exactly what New
Labour did. An astonishing number of New Labour people, from [Blair's
right-hand man and notorious sodomite] Peter Mandelson to Alan Milburn,
are former Marxist comrades who have never been subjected to the sort
of in-depth digging into their pasts that Jeremy Corbyn faces. Why is
this? Is one kind of Marxism OK, and the other sort not?"
(11) Gary Allen's None Dare Call it Conspiracy (1972),
is a short, easily digestible introduction to the New World Order flow
chart. It lists all these mega-wealthy Western financiers, and
documents both their notorious funding of Communism and their control
of influential supra-national bodies. The same names and institutions
continually recur: the Council on Foreign Relations; the Bilderbergers;
Kuhn & Loeb, JP Morgan, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Warburgs,
Schiffs, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros. et. al.