Never underestimate the American Empire.
The Mixture with Evil
A wise man once told me that the greatest enemy of the summum bonum is not actually manifest evil.
No.
The greatest enemy of the good is that which is almost good. It is that which has a convincing mixture of good and bad, truth and falsehood – in order to deceive.
So that the summum bonum is ignored, forgotten, and cast aside.
This saying is true, I’m afraid, in the relationship of the American Empire to the post-war, post-Vatican II Catholic Church.
I myself am a zelous Patriot. I am a lover and defender of my state of Michigan. I am eternally grateful to be a part of these United States. I grew up sleeping in tents and hiking through a few dozen of these States, from coast to coast.
I will go further.
These United States, not only in the land and people, but also in its economic and governmental systems, represent some of the best of the Catholic Anglo genius outside the Commonwealth of nations and His Majesty’s domains. And I will gladly fight to defend my State, the land of my French forefathers in the Faith, from enemies foreign and domestic.
But I cannot be naïve as to buy into the Americanist Messianism that so many of my countrymen and fellow Catholics have fallen into.
And I cannot be so foolish as to underestimate the American deep state, which has been using psychological warfare against its own citizens since at least the Great War, aka World War I (see the story of Ed Bernays for that…).
It was shortly after this war, with all of its horror, that Jacque Maritain, a recent immigrant to my region, began to see all the true greatness of these States and seemed to confuse this greatness with the social summum bonum of Christendom, proposing a new Christendom, the Humanisme integral of 1936.
The Vatican Bank Begins
In that same year, writes Mr. Coulombe, Eugenio Pacelli dined with President Roosevelt, and “became very impressed with America and its strength.”[1]
Pacelli became Pius XII and set up the Vatican Bank, that twisted web of money, Masons, Mafia and… the American deep state.
As Mr. Wemhoff has shown in his penetrating study, Pius XII (who seemed to match his great predecessor Leo XIII in holiness and erudition, but also bold enthusiasm for ralliement with post-Revolution Liberal republics), facilitated the infiltration of the American deep state into the Vatican.
And this was the 1950s, at a time when the American Empire’s worldwide psychological warfare program was rivaled only by the Soviet Empire.
Paul VI of course played into this Vatican Bank corruption, and John Paul II failed to crack down on it fast enough as Cardinal Gagnon had insisted.
The Soviets’ Global Successor State
And after 1991, the American Empire has achieved worldwide dominion, utilising psychological warfare against its own citizens again to overcome the “Vietnam syndrome” and invade the Middle East and fight Iraq (the first time) to protect US economic interests in the region.
About the same time, the American elites no doubt realised that their quasi-alliance with Papa Wojtyła against the Soviets was at an end, when he refused to ask “How high?” in Centessimus Annus when the First Iraq War commanded the United Nations (and the world) to “Jump!”[2] By that point, John Paul II had finally removed the American bishop Marcinkus from the corrupt Vatican Bank, following Gagnon’s dossier.
The American deep state gravy train was suddenly losing its Vatican allies just as the Sankt Gallen Mafia was gaining power in the 1990s.
All the while the fallen angels circled around Pius XII’s Vatican Bank like demonic bats in a feeding frenzy on a dark night.
After St. John Paul II lead the worldwide episcopate to oppose the second invasion of the Middle East after 2001, the neo-con Catholic cheerleaders of American Empire were feeling isolated indeed.
But then the errors of Russia, hitherto promoted by the American Empire, showed their hand.
And by the turn of the Third Millenium, the regime of the unborn holocaust (spread worldwide by the American and Soviets Empires alike) was beginning to manifest itself in what Athanasius Schneider would deem a much more sinister successor to the Soviets: the totalitarian, worldwide dominion of gender ideology (fueled by the unborn holocaust and the billion-dollar economy of violence against women and children known by the Marxist newspeak of “pornography”).
Is it any wonder that the elites who were driving the American regime into the arms of this demonic octopus – now manifest throughout these United States, even in public libraries! – would find common cause with the Sankt Gallen Mafia whose designs were to oppose Ratzinger as future pope in the 1990s?
New Allegations about Benedict’s Resignation
Now, new allegations have emerged from a first-hand source that the Vatican Third Pornocracy mafia is much worse than the Sankt Gallen Mafia. Indeed, as reliable sources have reported, the Masonic conspiracy already unearthed by order of Paul VI made a “pact of steel” already in 1978. According to Maike Hickson’s newest report, citing Marco Tosatti’s collaborator, retired Italian general Piero Laporta:
Laporta then revealed that there exists “a great Roman circle that is still active today,” that is more powerful than the so-called “Sankt Gallen group,” which has been historically opposed to Benedict.
Laporta further relayed that in 2005, “a leading delegate of the U.S. government, who had his hands in Italian finances (where he is still active) and in Italian politics,” and was “a figure in the highest ranks of the National Security Agency (NSA),” was “bragging about the resignation to which H.H. Benedict XVI of revered memory would soon be forced.”
This man, Laporta went on to say, spoke “with a nonchalance and with an arrogance” outside of his own circle about this matter.
This “Roman circle” was reportedly dedicated to the slogans “God is dead” and “Jesus is fake news,” and was in “panic” when Benedict was elected.
The “Sankt Gallen Mafia,” Laporta added, was “no joke,” but is a mere fig leaf compared to this “Roman circle” that Laporta refers to as a “dome of demons.”
As Dr. Hickson rightly notes, this is another piece of the puzzle. She points out in connection with this, that the mysterious shut down of the Vatican Bank coincided with the resignation of Benedict, as Marshall describes here.
What Now?
This appears to be another revelation of the mysterium iniquitatis that the fallen angels have been furiously but vainly trying to orchestrate especially since the Great War to “make the world safe for democracy” as Wilson so foolishly said, paving the way for National Socialism.
And as hideous as this piece might be (this is a first-hand report, but not yet confirmed by any other sources), if it is true we should thank God that darkness is being brought into the light.
Indeed, we know there exist two dossiers that uncover all of the Masonic-Marxist conspiracy of the Vatican sitting right there in Vatican archives (unless they’ve already been destroyed!).[3]
What is a faithful Catholic to do if this is true?
1. First of all, don’t panic, and don’t worry. That comes from the devil. If you start questioning your faith in the Roman dogmas or the Papacy, you are under the influence of Satan. Reject this temptation, stop reading this essay, and go pray for an increase of faith. Take a break from the internet, take on some real penance for Lent, and revisit this in Paschaltide.
If your faith is rock solid about Roman dogmas, as Traditionalists commonly are (despite what our critics often rashly and uncharitably allege against us), then we must consider a few things, if this report is true.
2. It may be that Benedict was placed in a hostage-type situation which forced him to resign. We may never know all the machinations of the fallen angels which came against him and convinced him to make this decision. I completely sympathise with those who say Joseph Ratzinger was a derelict father who abandoned his children to the wolves. This may be true, since Ratzinger had always had a weakness of pusillanimity, just as John Paul II had a weakness for incaution. As Ms. Meloni points out in her critical book, there is circumstantial evidence that Ratzinger made a deal with Cardinal Martini before the former was elected pope.
However, it is not true that the analogy holds like a father abandoning his family, since the pope can be replaced. What if Benedict actually trusted the Holy Spirit to bring a new successor who would be, in his humble opinion, a better and more effective (read: disciplinary) holy father than himself? (the episcopacy of St. Chad and St. Theodore comes to mind[4]). Obviously this did not happen, but that would be a reasonable, charitable interpretation of the resignation.
We simply don’t have all the archives and documentation to know for certain.
3. But let’s consider another factor here: even if it was the case that the American Empire more-or-less deposed Benedict, we’ve had other popes who have been “forced to resign freely” (Popes Silverius and John XII for example). In these messy situations, the Church just moves on with a new pope, while theologians and historians still debate when and where each papacy ended and began to this day. That’s literally about a thousand years of debating this question.
Literally.
So don’t get worked up about this, ladies and gentlemen. It’s a disputed question even if a pope can be deposed at all.
I can understand where the BIP (“beneplenist”) people are coming from (and to be fair, their hypothesis is more reasonable at least than the sedes), but the Papacy is not a Sacrament, nor is it like marriage, where any lack of consent invalidates the possession of the See (modern canonical norms notwithstanding).
In any case these are questions disputatae, and no sane, faithful Catholic (even if you have good faith doubts) would break communion with Pope Francis over theological speculation, like the sedes do. It is simply not our place to judge on disputed matters. Leave that to the theologians and the Magisterium.
4. Even if this report is false, the Church is not the pope and the pope is not the Church. And we’ve still got the problem of Pope Francis. Bottom line: you can still trust the Sacraments (even in the Novus Ordo!) to confer Sacramental grace so you can save your soul. Do not be anxious about things you cannot control, but do your duty: save your soul, and that of your family, and work to help your neighbour get to heaven.
This doesn’t change any of that, and that’s your first duty (did I mention Lent is coming?).
—
I wouldn’t be surprised at all if this report turns out to be true. Deposing world leaders by means of Black Ops is routine for the American Empire. Just ask Mohammad Mosaddegh!
And that was in 1953.
As we saw with the COVID-regime, worldwide psychological warfare has reached its zenith by means of the “smart” phone, which is smart enough to do your own thinking for you.
It may seem strange that the American official allegedly said “soon” Benedict would be forced to resign… years before 2013.
But that just reminds me again of Iran. It reminds of how Saddam Hussein was an American puppet before he was an American enemy. On the morning of 9/11, Donald Rumsfield had a meeting to, as he put it in his notes, “Judge whether [this terrorist attack was] good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein].”
The elites of this world worship one thing: money, that root of all evil. They are puppets of the fallen angels.
The demons play the long game, even when their human puppets don’t even realise what they are doing.
Thankfully, we know who wins in the end. And we’re fighting for true King, Jesus Christ, who will kill [Antichrist] with the spirit of his mouth (II Thess. ii. 8).
As Dietrich von Hildebrand, whom Pius XII dubbed the “Doctor of the church in the 20th Century,” wrote against Vatican II optimism:
There is, in other words, no reason whatever for optimism; therefore let our hope grow in proportion! For the Lord God has said, and still repeats to us today: Et portae inferi non praevalebunt.[5]
Some links in this post contribute affiliate income for OnePeterFive.
[1] Coulombe, Vicars of Christ, 321.
[2] “Returning now to the initial question: can it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society? Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress? The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. But if by “capitalism” is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative (Centesimus Annus, 42).
[3] The first was made by the stalwart churchmen Cardinal Gagnon under Paul VI aforementioned, and the second was made under Benedict XVI shortly before his resignation (the so-called “Vatileaks” scandal).
[4] St. Chad to St. Theodore: “If you know that I have not duly received episcopal ordination, I willingly resign the office, for I never thought myself worthy of it; but, though unworthy, for obedience sake I submitted, when bidden to undertake it” (Bede, Hist. Eccl. Angl., Bk IV, Ch. 2).
[5] Dietrich von Hildebrand, Charitable Anathema (Roman Catholic Books: 1993), 10.
