Amici,
The
Catholic Church has always attracted enemies. And, as with Judas
Iscariot, it has always carried enemies within it. In more modern times,
Communists have been bent on destroying it, at whatever the cost. Bella
Dodd alleged they successfully infiltrated it and nearly destroyed it over
the past half century. She should know. She was organizing it.
But
for that half century and more, rumors swirled about the Roman Catholic
Church that the Lucerferian organizations commonly called Freemasons
were playing a more aggressive and debilitating role in the
Church. (Lucerferians are an upscale, bigshot version of your basic Satanist.) A secret organization of Protestant and non-religious elites
since the early 18th century (George Washington was one), are the
Freemasons diabolical in some way, specifically Lucerferian? Ask any
Catholic exorcist, like Fr. Ripperger. For links, see the site The Slaying Dragons Book.
To
most modern-day Protestant Americans, Freemasons exist primarily as an
"old boy network" or are popularly seen a goofy beneficial "do-gooder"
society, like the Shriners with their charity-raising parades. Their
history in Europe, however, is much more sinister, even now. (It's
sinister enough in America!) Various famous popes over the past three
centuries wrote about this. They had information we don't. And were this
Freemason war against the Church true, it would explain a lot, wouldn't
it? Officially a non-religious society, Freemasonry, since its
inception in the early 1700s in England (in part to keep the Catholic
Stewarts from ever returning to the throne), it has been utterly
antithetical to the Church. Now, however, incredibly, they're out in the
open. And in the Church. Bergoglio appointed a Freemason Catholic chaplain to a high Vatican position. (From the last rorate-caeli link further below.)
Besides, I just learned—and this is public knowledge—that Papa Bergoglio has appointed a priest and a Freemason to a Vatican position. Monsignor Michael Heinrich Weninger, chaplain to three Masonic Lodges in Austria, is a member of the Pontifical Commission for Interreligious Dialogue. Monsignor Weninger is also the author of Lodge and Altar: On The Reconciliation of the Catholic Church and Regular Freemasonry. Therefore, why would it be hard to believe that the likes of Bugnini and Baggio helped pave the way for him and others so free-thinkingly inclined? God help us!
Even if you
know little about the Masons, why would a Catholic priest want to belong
this creepy, ersatz-mystical cult of hokey "rites"? What more could a musty, very dated organization of fat-cats add to Christ?
Fr. Charles Murr
These three rorate-caeli
links below contain interviews and discussion about the life and
testimony of one Fr. Charles Murr, an American priest who spent his
active priestly years deep inside the Vatican. Fr. Murr explains at
length about Freemasonry and its agents in the Church, in various
exchanges discussed at length. Now he's written a book.
At the first link, you can read about Fr. Murr's new book, Murder in the 33rd Degree. For those who don't know, the 33rd Degree is the highest level of Masonry. Kinda. Sorta. I.e., a
33rd degree is given to a Mason who shows dedicated commitment to the
("Ancient and Accepted") Scottish Rite Masons, and the degree cannot be
"earned" like the usual Masonic degrees – but only "bestowed" for exceptional service. It is said to be awarded "only sparingly".
No wonder that, for when admitted to the 33rd degree you are officially
told the Freemason "Great Architect of the Universe" is Satan, himself.
The other two interviews, done earlier for "Inside the Vatican",
are amazingly informative even as dated as they are.
Basically,
the Vatican II Church was wrecked from the beginning. There are many
reasons, Modernism chief among them. But why was Modernism triumphant?
Tainted, cursed, even now after more than a half century,
third-generation "Protestant Catholics, as Fr. Murr says, insist on
crashing the Church and trying to kill Catholicism's most distinctive
feature, the Traditional Latin Mass. After a half century of obvious
failure, on the infamous "New Coke" lines, the hierarchy stays insanely
loyal to this failed Vatican II "product". After all, "New Coke" only
lasted five years and then they changed its name and brought back old
Coke (initially as "Coke Classic"). New Coke lingered on with dwindling sales until 2002.
With
hindsight about Vatican II as a guide, many priests and traditional
Catholic historians of Vatican II now claim the Council itself to be
defective, hopelessly so, even though Fr. Murr wouldn't have it
"cancelled" because it involved a couple of thousand bishops and was
initiated and presided over by two popes, John 23 and the pathetic Paul
6. Murr reports that Pius 12th's housekeeper, the formidable Sister
Pascalina, commonly called "Mother" Pacalina, had a talk with the then
German chancellor, Conrad Adenauer, after he had first met John XXIII, and Adenauer told the German nun that John (Angelo Roncalli), was an idiot. "Clown" was the word Adenauer used.
- I myself, FWIW, dismiss Vatican II entirely merely because of the way it was stage-managed, with all those bishops shuttled into committees and pushed around by young priests in service to the Modernist bigshots. The bishops, old and wise or otherwise, were given already written-up issues to "debate", and then vote on after only a few minutes carefully timed discussion – no real argument or conversations, even, were allowed; certainly no room allowed to the Holy Ghost! No matter how learned or wise they were, timekeepers STRICTLY limited the bishops in how many minutes they could speak, no matter their own personal stature or how important the topic. It was just a joke. I would have walked out, as it was clearly a bureaucracy-choreographed dog-and-pony show Modernists put on to give a veneer of respectability to the entire fraud. And you know the Modernists themselves didn't respect the Council. Look how they've treated it since! They ignore it and go by what they call "the spirit" of Vatican II. So, since they don't respect it, why should we? (That's a rhetorically useful touché but also quite a serious query.)
Good Guys, Bad Guys
Reading these Fr. Murr interviews, you learn about various important cardinals of the '60s and '70s: Cardinals like Baggio, Villot, Benelli and Gagnon.
The first two are bad guys; the second two good guys. And naturally, the repugnant Bugnini is mentioned many times. At Paul VI's
request, Gagnon did a years-long report on Freemasons in the Vatican,
which was stolen once though Gagnon had a backup. Murr believes it was
stolen primarily so someone could blackmail the people the research
exposed. (That would explain a lot of the hierarchy's behavior since
then, wouldn't it?) Although he commissioned it, Paul 6 did a "Lost Ark
hide it forever" ploy and few have ever seen it; Paul VI might not have
read it himself. By the time it was delivered to him, he pushed it aside;
he hadn't long to live. It was probably showed to John Paul I, who, curiously, hadn't long to live.
Bottom line
Reading
all this, I can only say that the good guys, the orthodox Catholic
bigshots like Bellini, either couldn't believe what was happening or if
they fully grasped it, they insisted on working 'within the system' and
that betrayed them about like our governmental system has betrayed us
all in the last five-ten years, or far more, or course. And also, disgusted as
they were, they didn't want to damage the institution of the papacy.
Right. Archbishop Lefebvre is almost unique in voting for the Council
documents, then, when he saw how the game was being played out, Lefebvre
went against the pressure to conform to the point of going outside
(quasi-outside, according to some, and not outside at all, according to
others) of the Church. His SSPX today looks and acts and teaches like
the Church is supposed to, while the Vatican II Church looks like a
looser version of the Anglicans.
Meanwhile,
as ever, the bad guys kept to their program for a true Communist "long
march through the institutions" for years and over the decades they
brought their evil schemes great success. Murr at one point, talking about Paul 6
or Bellini, etc., said they were handicapped because they didn't have a
copy of Alinski's Rule for Radicals. It would have explained to them exactly what was going on.
So,
friends, I send these interviews and book news along to you-all, if any
of you are interested. We need to know our enemy. Sun Tzu wrote, "If
you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a
hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every
victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the
enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.".
It's funny that I go to Sun Tzu for wisdom, isn't it? Him and the 7,000-year-old Dr. Lao.
No comments:
Post a Comment