Thursday, August 19, 2010

Excerpts from The Plot Against the Church (Maurice Pinay)

Maurice Pinay is a pseudonym for twelve priests who tried to warn the "Council Fathers" of Vatican II of the machinations of the enemy they knew to be among the "fold".  "Pinay" is quoted as a historian and nothing more, hence the blog owner does not agree with all of "his" statements, least of all with those where "he" designates heretics or schismatics as Catholics, or calls the organization under the modern antipopes the Catholic Church.

Please also read: 

Part 3: The Synagogue of Satan


Jewish Freemasonry, Communism, and the various political forces that control both, have brought countless attacks against the temporal policy of the Holy Catholic Church. One of the most frequent attacks is made with reference to the Inquisitional Court and the publicly made judgment of the religious court, which some clergy, out of lack of knowledge of history or as a result of propagandistic, Freemasonic-Liberal influence, have been duped to the degree that they think that Holy Church has erred in its Inquisitorial policy; and things have come to such a pass that they attempt to avoid this question with verbal disputes or with an unconscious feeling of guilt.

This shameful conduct stands in contrast to the personal behaviour of some Jewish historians, who, as believers in truth, approve some positive points of the Inquisitorial system, like Cecil Roth, who in his work “Storia del Popolo Ebraico” says:

“... One must admit that, from its standpoint, the Inquisition was just. Only rarely did it take steps without a reliable foundation; and when a matter was in progress, the ultimate purpose consisted in obtaining a complete admission, which, united with the feeling of repentance would redeem the victims from the terrors of eternal torment. The punishments laid down were never regarded as such, more as a redeeming sacrifice.”

In this much disputed matter, which the enemies of Catholicism have regarded as the “Achille’s heel” of the Church, one must not lose sight of reality in the midst of the host of lies, falsification and historical deceit, which conceal the truth as if with a dense undergrowth, which was intentionally woven for this purpose by the Jews and their accomplices. The Inquisitorial policy of Holy Church, far from being something punitive or anything of which the Church should be ashamed, was not only theologically justified, but of the greatest value for mankind, which, thanks to the Holy Inquisition, described by the Popes, Councils, Theologians and Saints of the Church as holy, then saw itself freed of the catastrophe that now threatened them, and which would already have occurred several centuries ago.

We are not of the opinion that in the present one should attempt to force religion upon anyone by violence, nor that anyone should be persecuted on account of his ideas; for the truth will be able to establish itself without the necessity of resorting to compulsory methods; in fact we know that Holy Church, tolerant and good-willed in its early times, had to adjust itself in the face of an extraordinary situation. There was the deadly threat that International Jewry had planned for all Christianity in the twelfth century. This threat in its gravity can only be compared with that which at present is represented for free mankind by Jewish Communism.

In order to save Christianity from this danger, Holy Church had to take refuge in the most extreme methods, whose justification is already proven solely through the circumstance that the misfortune, which now threatens mankind, was delayed by several centuries. In their thousand-year long struggle against the Church of Christ the Jews used, as their principal weapon of battle, the “Fifth Column”, which arose as thousands and thousands of Jews all over the world were converted in a hypocritical manner to Christianity.

The already mentioned Jewish historian Cecil Roth confirms in his previously quoted work “Storia del Popolo Ebraico”, page 229, Milan 1962, that “... naturally the conversions were for the most part a pretence...” They were baptised and remained nevertheless just as much Jews in secret as before, although they have given themselves Christian names, went to Mass and frivolously received the sacraments. They then used their new position as seeming Christians to set up false teachings, which developed into underground movements. This would have brought about the dissolution of Christianity and secured the rule by Jewry over all peoples, as will be elaborated on later with irrefutable proofs.

It was soon seen that the whole of Christianity was threatened by death, unless the necessary measures were seized upon to command a halt to the secret organisations of Jewry and the secret societies which the concealed Jews formed among the true Christians. The conclusion was reached that Holy Church could only defend itself and mankind from destruction by setting up a similar secret organisation. There remained no other choice than to oppose the secret anti-Christian organisations with equally secret counter-bodies. So arose the very effective organisation of the Inquisition court.

An often alluded to fact of the Inquisition is the burning of the secret Jews or their execution through the garrotte, in which respect it is difficult to establish the exact number of those executed who were Judaised heretics, as the Church described those who in appearance were Christians but in secrecy practised Judaism. Many estimate at thousands, and others at tens of thousands, the number of underground Jews who were killed by the Inquisition; however, whatever number it may be, the enemies of the Church have directed unjustified attacks against it on account of this procedure. The mitigation of responsibility that has been granted the Church, on the grounds that it did not directly execute those found guilty but handed them over to the worldly authority, is easily refuted by the enemies of Catholicism. They say that, although the Church did not directly condemn and kill them, then nevertheless it gave its approval to the Inquisitorial procedures and to the laws that punished the backsliding Jewish heretics with death. In addition it had given its agreement for six centuries to these executions. Another weak proof of the defenders of the Church has been the assertion made that the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions were devices of the State and were not directed by the Church; but this thought process is powerless, for one cannot apply it to the Papal Inquisition, which was in progress over three centuries in the whole of Christian Europe, and which was directed by none other than his Holiness the Pope, who personally appointed the Grand Inquisitor. The remaining Franciscan or Dominican Inquisitors exercised their functions as papal delegates with full papal authority. It is certain that the Papal Inquisition sent thousands of secret Jews to be burned at the stake, who, although they were executed through the worldly arm of authority, died with the approval of Holy Church. The latter for its part had itself approved the procedures used to judge them, the laws which condemned them and the executions. If the Church had not been in agreement with the death sentences against the Jews, it would have prevented the same through a command. Even with the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions, which were State institutions and where the Grand Inquisitor was appointed by the King and not by the Pope, Holy Church authorised the Dominican order in the setting up of Inquisition courts, to prosecute and seek out the Jews, to imprison them and to conduct the whole process up to the handing over of them to the worldly power of authority. Also in these cases the Church had given its agreement to the laws that empowered the worldly arm of authority to burn these malefactors or to strangle them with the garrotte.

In order to establish an effective and convincing defence of Holy Church and the Inquisition, one much possess the courage to take refuge in the truth and only in the truth. Holy Church will never need to fear it, for its actions are always determined by justice and fairness. Therefore with the truth, which always wins in the end, and which is expressly elaborated in the book with the title “The Jewish Fifth Column in the Clergy”, a truthful defence of the Holy Catholic Church is asserted in relation to its Inquisitorial policy.

First we will begin with the proof that the Jews are not untouchable people by virtue of the fact that at one time they were the chosen people of God, but, on the contrary, God predicted to them that, in the event of their not keeping His commandments, they would be very severely punished. From this consideration, the policy of the Church towards the Jews with regard to the Inquisition has a broad theological foundation. The Jews still boast at present of being the chosen people of God, which they tend to substantiate based upon certain passages of the Holy Bible, of which they give a false and ambitious interpretation. However, in so doing, they are very careful to avoid other Bible passages, in which God clearly and unequivocally linked this privilege to the condition that they faithfully fulfilled the commandments and other commands of God under the threat that, if they would not do so, the distinction of being the chosen people would be withdrawn and they would be transformed into an accursed people who would encounter diverse punishments, which were expressly indicated to Moses by God. However, the Jews attempted to conceal this position of things, just as certain Christian clergy attempt to do, whose apparently inexplicable conduct more favours Jewry and its revolutionary plans than the Holy Church of Christ. In Deuteronomy of the Holy Bible, Chapter XXVIII, Verses one and two, Moses, who conveys the divine will to the Hebrews, describes quite clearly this situation.

“1. And it shall come to pass, if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all His commandments which I command thee this day, that the Lord thy God will set thee on high above all nations of the earth:

“2. And all these blessings shall come on thee and overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God.”

From the foregoing it is perfectly clear that the distinction of Israel, as a people chosen and blessed of the Lord, is clearly linked to the fact that it keeps all His commandments and obeys the voice of the Lord. It is therefore completely false to assert that God regards it in a final and unconditional manner as a chosen people. He gave it the possibility of retaining this privilege; however, since the Jewish people had neither kept nor keeps the Commandments, nor listens to the voice of the Lord, it trampled upon the obligation that was laid upon it in order to preserve this exceptional position, and drew the divine imprecations upon itself. One must recall that after Moses mentions all the blessings that God would grant to the Israelites, if they kept all his commandments and would listen to the voice of the Lord, he records the terrible curses that would strike them, if they did the opposite. Whoever wishes to learn these completely, can take the Bible, for proof, in Deuteronomy, Chapter XXVIII, and Leviticus XXVI. Here we will only restrict ourselves to quoting some of the most important passages:

In the chapter of Deuteronomy mentioned, Moses says in conveying the Commandments of God:

“15. But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to observe to do all his Commandments and His statutes which I command thee this day, that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee:

“16. Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field.

“17. Cursed shall be thy basket and thy store.

“18. Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

“19. Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out.

“20. The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke in all that thou settest thine hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly; because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken Me.

“21. The Lord shall make the pestilence cleave unto thee, until He have consumed thee from off the land, whither thou goest to possess it.

“22. The Lord shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a fever, and with an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with the sword, and with blasting, and with mildew; and they shall pursue thee until thou perish.

“24. The Lord shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust; from heaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed.

“25. The Lord shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies; thou shalt go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them; and shall be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.

“43. The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.

“45. Moreover, all these curses shall come upon thee and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which He commanded thee:

“48. Therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things; and He shall put a yoke of iron upon thy neck, until He have destroyed thee. (First a fearful prophecy of enslaving and then of destruction of the Jews, through foes which God himself will lay as punishment and curse over them.)

“54. So that the man that is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children, which he shall leave.

“55. So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat; because he hath nothing left him in the siege, and in the straitness wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in all thy gates.

“62. And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye were as the stars of heaven for multitude; because thou wouldest not obey the voices of the Lord thy God!”

In Chapter XXVI of Leviticus the reward is likewise mentioned, which is offered by God to the Jewish people, whereby He promises that it will be His chosen and blessed people, if it observes His commandments, and will be cursed, if it does not keep them. In addition, He prophesies the punishments with which He will punish its bad behaviour. Of the curses, which God in this last case casts directly against the Israelites, we quote only those which we regard as of the highest importance. Those who wish to learn them all, we refer to the Holy Bible, which served as source in this matter.

“14. But if ye hearken not unto Me, and will not do all these commandments; 15. And if ye shall despise My statutes, or if your soul abhor My judgments, so that ye will not do all My commandments, but that ye break My covenant: (Here God the Lord plays upon the fact that the Jews with their sins have broken and made invalid the agreement of bond which God has concluded with the said people.)

“16. I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart; and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it!

“17. And I will set My face against you, and ye shall be slain before your enemies; they that hate you shall reign over you; and ye shall flee when none pursueth you. (A further prediction of destruction). (It is of import to establish how the collective persecution mania from which the Jewish people suffers at present, agrees in surprising manner with this divine curse.)

“18. And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins!

“38. And ye shall perish among the heathen, and the land of your enemies shall eat you up.

“39. And they that are left of you shall pine away in your enemies’ lands; and also in the iniquities of their fathers shall they pine away with them.”

The word of God speaks for itself. God gave Israel a very great privilege, but not in order to use it as a common law, which could allow it to commit unpunished every kind of sins and crime and to violate the divine commandments and statutes. For this very reason God, who is justice itself, linked the existence of this privilege and this blessing to very strict conditions, which were intended to secure the good use of the same by the Jews. As a condition He laid upon them that they should not only heed a few, but expressly all the commandments, as is stated very clearly in various verses of “Deuteronomy” and of “Leviticus.” He also commanded that they hear the divine ordinations, treasure the wisdom contained in them, and observe the laws made by God (Leviticus, Chapter XXVI, Verses 14 and 15), otherwise the agreement or alliance which God had granted the people in question would become invalid. What have the Jews in fact done over three thousand years? Instead of fulfilling the commandments and other conditions made by God, they killed the greater part of the Prophets, denied God’s Son, slandered and killed Him. They sinned against the first commandment which commands us to love God above all things, against the fifth which commands us not to kill, and against the eighth which forbids bearing of false witness and lying. In addition, they murdered various disciples of Christ, soiled their hands in bloody revolutions, during which opportunity they killed millions of human creatures, plundered the wealth of Christians by first robbing the latter through usury, afterwards through Communism, and thereby in terrible manner blasphemed the name of God in the Communist lands, without there being any foundation to the claim, which they make in their secret assemblies, that they would do this only transitorily for some centuries, until the destructive machine of Communist Socialism had destroyed all false religions, in order to erect on the ruins of the same the completely distorted religion of the God of Israel and His chosen people, who would be the future family of mankind. It must be remarked that the blasphemies and the denial of God through materialistic Communism are not directed against this or that religion regarded as false, but against God, against all universal spiritual values. Neither the insanity of the “Synagogue of the Devil” nor its demonic lust for power will ever be able to justify the monstrous blasphemies that are cast against God in the states subjected to the Socialist dictatorship of Communism, even if one may say that we are concerned with a purely passing situation of a few hundred years.

To put it briefly, instead of observing the commandments and everything which God made as a condition of their being His chosen people, they have violated all this systematically in the most far-reaching form, above all through committing murder of God, that terrible crime, which consists in the killing of the Son of God, and which represents the horrible peak of many crimes and violations of the commandments, which they have in addition carried out for two thousand years and even up to our days. So they have deserved all the curses and punishments with which God threatened them, when they, instead of observing the commandments, refused to obey them. The curses and punishments prophesied by God the Lord they have fulfilled to the letter, even the most terrible, which consist in mass destruction and murder. If one reads once again the aforementioned verses from the Bible, which speak of this destruction, and one compares them with the bloodbaths carried out among Jews in Europe when occupied by the Nazis, it will be proved that yet once again in history the curses and punishments predicted by our Lord God centuries ago have been fulfilled. Clearly the Creator has even used the Pagan peoples, such as the Chaldaeans, the Romans and others as implements of divine providence, in order to punish the misdeeds and sins of the Jewish people, and to fulfil the curses prophesied by God Himself. If the Hebrews or their agents within Christianity, in the reading of these lines, feel themselves afflicted, they must nevertheless recognise that we neither may nor can alter the divine order. In the following chapter we will see how the Biblical Prophets in conveying the will of God were even clearer than Moses in reference to the punishments that would scourge the Jews by reason of their sins and crimes.


Fourth Thesis: The Apostles accused the Jews and not the Romans of the death of Christ. Proofs:

In the Holy Scriptures, in the Acts of the Apostles (Chapter II), Saint Peter, addressing his words to the Jews of different lands who were gathered in Jerusalem, where each (after the descent of the Holy Ghost) heard the words of the Apostle in his mother tongue, said:

“14. Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words! 22. Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by Him, in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know. 23. Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.”

Peter thus clearly lays responsibility for the murder on the entire Jewish people and does not accuse the Romans. Do the clergy, who in such incredible manner assert the contrary, perhaps assume that Peter lied when he said to the Jews who were come from other provinces: “Men of Israel, ye have crucified and slain Him”?

In the third chapter of the aforementioned work we find the passage relating to the healing of the man lame from birth:

“11. And as the lame man which was healed held Peter and John, all the people ran together unto them, in the porch that is called Solomon’s, greatly wondering. 12. And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, ‘Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk? 13. The God of Abraham and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied Him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go. 14. But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses!”

In this passage of the New Testament, where the entire people was assembled, Saint Peter upbraids the Jews for having killed Christ.

In addition we find in the “Acts of the Apostles” (Chapter V) a passage where not only Saint Peter, but also the remaining Apostles, categorically accuse the Council of Elders of Israel, which was summoned by the priests, of the death of Christ:

“29. Then Peter and the other Apostles answered and said, ‘We ought to obey God rather than men. 30. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.’ ”

We have thus here a common evidence of the Apostles, which accused the Jews and not the Romans, of having killed Christ. If all this will still not suffice, we will quote in addition the evidence of Saint Paul and Saint Stephen, the first martyrs of Christianity.

Saint Paul, in his First Epistle to the Thessalonians (Chapter II), says with reference to the Jews:

“15. Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.”

In this verse Saint Paul describes the Jews in convincing manner as “contrary to all men.” This is a truth that can be doubted by no one who has thoroughly studied the mode of thought and the illegal activities of the Jewish people.

However, it is very probable that, if Paul had lived today, he would have been condemned as an enemy of the Jews, since he publicly announced a truth that may never be announced to any one, owing to the Jews and their accomplices within the clergy. When, on his side, the protomartyr Saint Stephen turned to the Jews of the Synagogue of the Freedmen, the Cyreneans, the Alexandrians and then to those of Cilicia and Asia, i.e. to Jews from different parts of the world, he said to them in the presence of the high priest, the spiritual leader of Israel:

“51. Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; as your fathers did, so do ye. 52. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers!”

The evidence of Saint Stephen thus agrees with that of the Apostles and with that of Saint Paul, when he regards the Jews in general, i.e. both those of Jerusalem and the remaining parts of Judaea, as well as those who live in other parts of the world, as a people responsible for deicide. All this is recorded in Holy Scripture, where one does not find a single verse that accuses the Romans of the murder.

In short, the preceding revelations of Christ Our Lord, as well as the evidence of the Apostles, including Saint Paul, represent an irrefutable proof that Holy Church, far from having erred over nineteen centuries, was completely right to regard the Jewish people as murderers of God; whereas to attribute responsibility for the crime to the Romans lacks any foundation.

Since this doctrine, which asserts that the Romans and not the Jews were responsible for the murder of our divine Redeemer, stands in contradiction to the evidence of Christ and the Apostles, it is proven in clear manner to be false and even heretical. At first sight, it seems absurd and inexplicable that a group of zealous Catholic clergy should be so emboldened to support such an apparent error in our days, which, if it were to prosper, would deny the truth of that which is said in the Holy Gospels, with all its unimaginable consequences. But such godless intrigues are explained, if one bears in mind that the “Synagogue of Satan”, as well as the clergy who stand in its service, are disturbed by the struggle that devout Christians from different parts of the world are conducting against Communism and against its father and instigator, the Jewish striving for power, and that they under all circumstances wish to reform the Church in such a manner as to allow them to use it henceforth as a serviceable tool of the Synagogue, in order to crush Catholics who fight heroically against it for the defence of Christendom and its threatened and oppressed nations. In order to attain this, it must in the first place destroy the Jew-hostile teachings of the Church Fathers, of the Popes and Councils. In their indescribable insolence they go so far as to demand the setting up of new doctrines, such as those which represent the Romans and not the Jews as responsible for this despicable murder. As long as Christians continue to regard the Jewish people as the murderers of God, every assertion that has the aim of regarding them as good, holy and untouchable, is condemned to failure. However, the Hebrews fight bitterly to force upon Christianity a false doctrine, which declares them as the beloved, sacred and untouchable of God and then allows them to carry out free and without contradiction all their conspiracies and crimes. We will study later, how many other reforms, which the so-called Liberals and progressive clergy plan, have no other purpose than to destroy the traditions of the Church as sources of our teaching, in order to render easier the destructive plans of Communism and of Jewish hunger for power.

Part 4: The Jewish Fifth Column in the Clergy


Arianism, the great heresy, which split Christianity over three and a half centuries, was the work of a concealed Jew, who outwardly practised Christianity; a striking and infamous example of the descendants of Judas Iscariot, like all those priests who, as members of the “Jewish Fifth Column”, have infiltrated into the Catholic Church.

The well-known American writer, William Thomas Walsh, who is outstanding for his zealous Catholicism and has well documented works, says to us, referring to the mode of action of the Jews who infiltrated into Christianity, the following: “Arius, the Catholic Jew (Father of the heresy) treacherously attacked the divinity of Christ, and he was successful in dividing the Christian world for centuries.”

From the trials by the Inquisition against the crypto-Jews, who were called the Judaising heretics, one can conclude that the Trinity is one of the Catholic dogmas which the Jews reject most violently; for what repels them most of all in their deadly hatred towards Christ, is the fact that Jesus Christ is regarded as the second person within the Holy Trinity; this means that God is One in essence and Three in person. It is therefore illuminating that the Jews, after they had infiltrated into the Church through their pretended conversion to Christianity, afterwards strove to alter the dogma of the Church in such a way as to regard God as one in person and hence to deny the divinity of Christ.

Arius was born in Libya, which at this time was under Roman rule. Already as a youth he joined himself to the schism of Melesius, who usurped the office of the Bishop of Alexandria; however, after the cause of Melesius had suffered severe setbacks, Arius was reconciled with the Church. It is well known how the Jews make use of such reconciliations with the Church, of which they say themselves that such were performed as true comedies, exactly as suits them.

The always universally kind Holy Church, which is fundamentally ready to pardon the repentant sinner, sanctioned the reconciliation with Arius, by taking him anew into its holy bosom, while this secret Jew merely made use of this kindness, like all who belong to his race, in order to later cause it inconceivable harm which could easily have caused such misfortune as that which threatens us today.

After Arius had consoled himself, he had himself consecrated as Catholic priest and presbyter of the Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, by whom he was entrusted with the church of Baucalis. Various outstanding Church historians attribute to Arius an extraordinary and impressive asceticism as well as a remarkable mysticism; to which are added his great talents as a preacher and a convincing dialectic skill, which allowed him to convince the great mass of believers and even the hierarchies of Holy Church.

The basic principle of the Arian doctrine was the Jewish thesis of the absolute unity of God, denying the Trinity and representing Christ solely as the most exalted of all creatures, but in no way as possessing divine nature. This was one of the first serious attempts to provide Christianity with a Jewish stamp.

He neither attacked Christ nor criticised Him, as the professing Jews did; for then his mission would have failed, because no Christian would have supported him. In order to arouse no suspicion, he rather praised Jesus beyond all measure. So he gained the sympathy and interest of the faithful and then in the midst of all these speeches of praise he allowed his poison to seep in with the cunning denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, since it is the point which encounters the most stiff-necked rejection by the Jews.

It is curious that, fourteen hundred years later, the Jews strike the same note when they deny the divinity of Christ and simultaneously praise Him in their doctrines and instructions in order to provoke no strong reactions amongst Christians introduced into the sect.

A further innovation which the Arian heresy brought with it, was the attempt to alter the doctrine and policy of the Church in relation to the Jews. While Christ damned them and upon various occasions attacked them in the sharpest possible way, and the Apostles did the same, as did the Church in general in its beginnings, Arius and his heresy strove to effect a true reform in this respect, in that they carried out a pro-Jewish policy and strove for an accommodation to the “Synagogue of Satan.”

Like John Huss, Calvin, Karl Marx, and other Jewish revolutionary leaders, Arius was a man of strong dynamism, of extraordinary perseverance as well as an artist of words and with the pen, who wrote pamphlets and even books, in order to convince the Church hierarchies, the civil governors and other outstanding personalities within the Roman Empire. The first important assistance was given to him on the part of Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia, who on grounds of his great friendship with the Emperor possessed the boldness of wishing to win the latter for the Arian heresy. Even if he was not successful in this, he nevertheless succeeded unfortunately in leading Constantine astray, by making him believe that it was simply a question of discussions between different orthodox viewpoints. Under this assumption the Emperor sought in vain to introduce a settlement between Arius and the Bishop of Alexandria. He sent his advisor, Hosius, the Bishop of Cordova, so that the latter might bring about an understanding between the two parties. No result was attained. As if it had merely been a personal dispute between Bishop Alexander and Arius!

In the course of these negotiations Hosius and the Church reached the conviction that here it was not a simple dispute between different schools or persons, but rather a conflagration which threatened to scorch the whole of Christianity.

This is worthy of being remarked, since it is the classical technique with which the Jews begin a revolutionary movement. Upon many occasions they give themselves out to be harmless, good-willed, of small influence and without any kind of danger, so that the institutions threatened by the revolutionary germ do not allot to the latter its true importance and therefore look away from applying their whole force against it, which is imperative if it is to be rapidly and effectively destroyed.

Lulled through this outward conduct, the Christian or Gentile leading personages are accustomed to avoid such measures, by reacting in a modest way. This is utilised by Jewry, in order to treacherously kindle the conflagration, so that, when combative measures are finally resolved upon, it already possesses such an overwhelming force that it is impossible to halt it.

It is interesting to remark that, after Arius had finally been excommunicated by the Synod called in the year 321 by the Prelate of Alexandria and attended by over a hundred bishops, the heretic at first went to Palestine, in order to win disciples. And it is further worthy of note that the first Synod to support Arius by betraying Catholicism was precisely that of Palestine, as well as that of Nicomedia, where Eusebius, Arius’ right-hand man, was Bishop. It is illuminating that it was Palestine where, in spite of the repressive measures of Titus and Hadrian, the most compact Jewish population was found, and where the “Jewish Fifth Column”, which had infiltrated into the Church, was very powerful. It is therefore not strange that Arius, declared outlawed through excommunication and in a desperate position, sought his salvation in flight, in order to seek support with his brothers in Palestine. He was so successful in this intention that an entire Synod of Bishops and high-ranking clergy, as was the Synod of Palestine, decided upon support of him and gave new power and prestige to his cause, which, after its condemnation by the Synod of Alexandria, seemed condemned to failure.

In the same manner another Synod, which was assembled in Nicomedia, supported Arius and imparted to him, like that of Palestine, its approval to return to Egypt. In such a way did Arius and his fellow travellers set one Synod against the other and thus divide the episcopate of the Catholic world.

The study of this giant struggle which lasted for centuries, is extremely valuable, since it allows us to clearly recognise that the “Jewish Fifth Column” which has seeped into the clergy of Holy Church, was then already effective with the same methods as centuries later, when it was successful by means of a crypto-Jew, Cardinal Pierleoni, in usurping the dignity of Pope. These are likewise the same methods which, a thousand years later, were combated by the Holy Inquisition, and the same of which we are witnessing in our days.

Arius and the Arianist Bishops intrigued against the clergy who defended Holy Church. They persecuted and feuded against them and even attacked the venerable Bishops and all priests, without regard for their rank, who had appeared to the fore through their zeal in the defence of Catholicism. They persecuted and fought them by means of secret and poisonous intrigues and by means of false accusations, until they were rendered harmless or destroyed.

By means of a well-organised action the Arians on their side strove to bring under their control the Bishops’ offices when they fell vacant, and they were successful in occupying them with clergy of their own way of thinking and of preventing true Catholics from finding admittance to this office.

These infamous manoeuvres were set in motion above all after the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. At this council Arius and his heresy were condemned in spite of the opposition of a minority of heretical bishops, who participated with them in the Council and who vainly attempted to bring about the victory of their viewpoints which were just as novel and contrary to the traditional Catholic doctrine as those which some bishops wish to make prevail at the present Ecumenical Council of Vatican II.

In the campaign instigated by the heretical bishops against the Catholics, the uproar that they set in motion against Eustasius, the Bishop of Antioch, is particularly notable. The latter was accused by them of pretending to observe the agreement of the Council of Nicaea, but in reality sowing the Sabellian heresy and discord. With these and other accusations the traitorous clergy were so successful that he was deposed and an Arianist bishop named in his stead. In addition, they were successful in deceiving Constantine, who, in the belief that he was offering the Church a service, exiled the devout bishop of the land and allowed the hypocritical heretics to enjoy his support, since he regarded them as the true defenders of the Church.

But more important still is the conspiracy that they instigated in order to destroy Saint Athanasius, who had succeeded Alexander, after the latter’s death, in the Patriarchate of Alexandria. Already at the Council of Nicaea he had demonstrated that he was one of the bulwarks in the defence of Holy Church. This had cost him the hatred of the Arian clergy, who recognised the necessity of making him harmless. In order to gain the Emperor to their side, they accused Saint Athanasius of cultivating relations with certain rebels of the Empire. This is the classical manoeuvre of Jewry in all times; if it is wished to remove any kind of leading personage from the sphere of the head of State, then at the suitable moment a conspiracy is instigated, in order to make the latter believe that the former conspires against him and is secretly allied with his enemies. In this manner they succeed in getting the head of State to remove leading personage who hinders the Jewish plans. In such a manner they accused Saint Athanasius of having humiliated the clergy by laying upon them a linen tax, as well as sowing discord in the ranks of the Church.

This slander is also a classical method of the “Fifth Column,” which, when it is seen that a conspiracy is instigated against Holy Church and someone denounces it or rushes to the defence of the institution, sends its crypto-Jewish clergy into the field to accuse the defenders of the Church of undermining the unity of the Church and of sowing discord among Christianity. In reality it is they, the enemies of Christ who have infiltrated into the clergy, who with their conspiracies and dark machinations provoke those schisms and divisions, and not the true Christians upon whom lies the duty of defending Catholicism and preventing the former from winning ground.

So it occurred in the case of Saint Athanasius; the heretical clergy were in reality those, who through their mode of action conjured up the schism. But they possessed the insolence to accuse Saint Athanasius of sowing discord, because he attempted to defend Holy Church in the face of the machinations of heresy.

The blow was additionally directed higher up; for Arius and his followers knew very well that the unity of the Church lay before the eyes of Constantine as the highest goal, and thus they hoped to bring down Saint Athanasius with a typical accusation of provoking discord.

Later, the Melesian heretics, working together with the Arians, accused Saint Athanasius of having murdered one of the collaborators of their leader; however, Athanasius was successful in discovering the whereabouts of the man whom he was falsely alleged to have murdered, so that the slanders were exposed.

Since up to then all intrigues had failed, they now took refuge in one last manoeuvre. In Tyre they summoned a Synod of Bishops, at which they accused Saint Athanasius of having seduced a woman; however, he was also successful in refuting this slander.

However, the Arian Bishops were successful in bringing under their control the Synod of Tyre and resolved upon the deposition of Saint Athanasius as Patriarch of Alexandria. Concerning this, an inflammatory note was despatched to bishops all over the world, so that the latter should break off all relations with Saint Athanasius, who was accused of various crimes. Constantine, who highly respected the decisions of the Synods of Bishops, was highly impressed. This together with another skilfully launched slander campaign, which accused Saint Athanasius of selling grain to the Egyptians in order to prevent it reaching Constantinople and in this manner to create a food shortage in the capital of the Roman Empire, made the Emperor furious. He banished the unfortunate Saint, whom at this time he regarded as the most dangerous disturber of public order and the unity of Holy Church.

While the Arian bishops first gained the sister of the Emperor, Constance, who exercised a strong influence upon him, and other confidants, to their side, they continually gave the hypocritical appearance of watching with zeal over the unity of the Church and of the Empire, which was so strongly desired by Constantine, and they accused the Catholics of endangering this unity with their exaggerations and eccentricities. They thus attained that Constantine, who had supported orthodoxy at the Council of Nicaea, carried out a deviation towards Arians and approved the solemn reacceptance of the latter into the bosom of the Church. This would have been without doubt the apotheosis and the highest triumph of the Jew Arius, who already played with the idea of demanding the Papal dignity of the Holy Catholic Church, which, regarded by modest human understanding, did not seem impossible; for he could already count upon the friendly approval of the Emperor and on the support of a daily growing number of bishops within Christianity. However, in the face of the support which God allows his Holy Church to enjoy, all human calculations must fail. The Church, will certainly be persecuted, but never conquered; and Arius died on the threshold of his victory in such a mysteriously tragic manner, as Saint Athanasius himself has recorded for posterity. It is very interesting to quote what the “Castilian Jewish Encyclopedia”, an official Jewish document, asserts about this great Church Father and Saint, Athanasius:

“Athanasius (Saint), Church Father (293-373), Patriarch of Alexandria, resolute opponent of the Arian teachings which approach a pure Monotheism and hence the Jewish doctrines. Athanasius polemicised against the Jews from dogmatic grounds, but the situation of the Jews worsened everywhere so that the teachings of Athanasius triumphed over the Arian doctrines, as was the case with the Visigoths in Spain.”

Like other Church Fathers, Saint Athanasius fought bitterly not only against the Arians, but also against the Jews. As one sees, the latter attribute such an importance to his teachings that the Jewish Encyclopaedia categorically admits, that “the situation of the Jews worsened where the teachings of Saint Athanasius triumphed.” It is therefore understandable that the powers of evil unleashed a satanic hatred against the Patriarch of Alexandria.

If Saint Athanasius and other great Church Fathers had lived in our time, the “Jewish Fifth Column”, which has infiltrated into the clergy, would certainly have done all in its power so that the Church condemned them on account of Antisemitism.

As far as the Bishop of Cordova, Hosius, is concerned, he had been another Paladin of the Church in the struggle against Arianism and was the soul of the Council of Nicaea, and was an active fighter against Jewry. After he had distinguished himself at the Council of Elvira, which under the name Illiberian Council was held in the years 300 to 303, he exercised a decisive influence upon the approbation of canons tending to effect a separation between Christians and Jews, in order to counter the nefast influence of the latter over the former. Since at that time the harmful fraternising of the Catholic clergy with the Jews was the order of the day, the Illiberian Council accordingly strove to counter this evil state with drastic measures. In this respect the following rules are interesting:

Canon L (50). “Should a priest or one of the faithful sit at table with Jews, then for his amendment he shall be excluded from Communion.”

Canon XLIX (49). “It has been found good to thoroughly admonish teachers that they should not suffer their fruits received from God to be blessed by Jews, so that our distribution of blessings does not become weak or valueless. Should anyone be presumptuous enough to do this, after it has been forbidden, then he should be excluded from the Church.”

Canon XVI (16). “It is determined among other things that the Jews, and likewise heretics, must not be permitted Catholic wives. So that there may be no communion between the faithful and unfaithful.”

This last Canon is clear and sharp. Any communion between Christians and Jews is regarded as dangerous.

The Illiberian Council had a great importance, since its disciplinary measures were to a great part incorporated in the general legislation of the Church.

After Constantine’s death, his three sons took over the government of the Empire: Constantine II and Constans in the west, and Constantius in the East. The first two were passionate Catholics, while Constantius was admittedly a good Christian, but was very influenced through friendship with his father’s friend, the Arian Eusebius of Nicomedia. After the death of Constantine, however, both Constantius as well as his two brothers approved of the return of Saint Athanasius and other orthodox bishops from banishment, who had been expelled from the land through the intrigues of the Arians. In addition, after the death of Eusebius of Nicomedia, in the year 342, this bad influence upon Constantius vanished, who, under the influence of his brother Constans and of Pope Julius, finally supported Catholic orthodoxy.

Extremely alarmed over the progress of Jewry, Constantius applied against the latter the measures that the Jews call the first great persecution on the part of the Christians.

For the course of twelve years, up to the death of Constans and of Pope Julius, the Catholics were successful in almost overcoming Arianism. Under the imprint of the sermons and the great regard for Saint Athanasius as well as Bishop Hosius of Cordova, it seemed destined to perish. Constantius had a long and extremely heartfelt conversation with Saint Athanasius in Antioch, during which the Emperor of the Orient showed him the greatest deference. And finally the illustrious Father of the Church made his entrance into Alexandria in a kind of veritable apotheosis.

When Ursacius and Valente, the leaders of Arianism, recognised imminent defeat and were alarmed by the firm conduct of Constantius in favour of orthodoxy, they bowed to the situation and went so far as to beg from the Pope their reconciliation with the Catholic Church.

This was one further example of the classical tactics of the foe, which the Jew Stalin called “strategic withdrawal.” This consists in yielding in the moment of defeat, in abandoning the struggle outwardly, in order to avoid defeat, and in conspiring in the background until one is sufficiently strong to risk a new attack as soon as the possibility of triumph appears.

If things went badly with Arianism, then it was worse still for Jewry; for when Constantius had convinced himself of the danger that it represented for the Empire and Christianity, he began, as the great Jewish historian Graetz proves, to expel the Jewish doctors of laws from the land. In consequence of this decree, many of them had to emigrate to Babylonia. The persecutions worsened to such a degree that the leading Jews were threatened with death, which resulted in an even greater flow of emigration, particularly from Judaea. This development caused the decline of the Jewish Academy of Tiberiades. The very frequent marriages between Jews and Christians were punished by Constantius with death, whereby he went beyond what was laid down in this respect by Canon 16 of the Illiberian Council.

As shown by the Israelite Graetz, the Jews were called “the murderers of God” by Catholics in that time. In answer to this, the Jews instigated isolated rebellions against the Empire, which, however, were nipped in the bud.

But all these setbacks did not discourage me enemy, who lurked in the background and awaited the first favourable opportunity to assert themselves again. This favourable opportunity began to show itself when first Constans and then Pope Julius died, whose beneficial influence had caused Constantius to hold firm to Catholicism.

The Arian leaders Valente and Ursacius, who had hypocritically implored their reconciliation with orthodoxy, took up their intrigues anew, while they sought at all costs to estrange Constantius from orthodoxy. For this purpose they flattered his selfishness and made use of his utterly violent reactions towards everything which might lessen his authority or his prestige. In the background the Arians instigated a true conspiracy, in order to distance Constantius from Saint Athanasius and thus obtain his withdrawal with them from orthodoxy. Among other slanders they accused him of disseminating defamatory rumours against the Emperor, by which he was alleged to represent the Emperor as a heretic and as excommunicated. In this manner they attempted to cause the people to withdraw their support from Saint Athanasius and at the same time to lyingly present him as an enemy of the Emperor. The Arians represented themselves as his most loyal subjects.

These sinister machinations against Athanasius and the Catholics infuriated Constantius. More and more he inclined to the side of the Arians, until finally in common with them he attempted to persuade Liberius, the new Pope, to divest the illustrious Church Father of his dignity.

It is incredible, how Jewry frequently manages to transform its sworn opponents into unconscious allies, whereby, as in this case, it makes use of the most subtle means in order to attain its goal. In history there have been several examples like that of Constantius.

The Holy Father, pressed by the Emperor, pointed out the necessity of calling a new Council to attempt to put an end to this dispute. With the agreement of the Emperor the Council of Arles was called, which took place in the year 353 in the presence of two Papal Legates. Great were the expectancies which the good placed upon the Council for the obtaining of Christian unity; but the bishops, led by Valente and Ursacius in the service of the “Fifth Column”, were able to instigate such intrigues and such pressures that the Council finally yielded to the demands of the Arians, who were granted support through the implacable pressure of Imperial power. Even the two Papal Legates yielded and, as a disastrous consequence, the unjust condemnation of Saint Athanasius was resolved upon.

The sole Bishop, who voted against the resolution, was Paulinus of Trier, who for this reason was expelled from the land. But when Pope Liberius received the knowledge of its disastrous outcome, he raised objectives and proposed summoning another Synod, which was held in Milan in the year 355. But this Synod also was the target of countless conspiracies and exposed to the pressure of the heretical bishops who enjoyed the support of the Emperor. Finally they were successful. This new Synod composed of 300 Bishops condemned Saint Athanasius once again. Thus Arianism gained a complete triumph and was able to again ban the highly regarded Saint. Since the Pontifex Maximus refused to yield to the demands of the Arians and of Constantius, the Emperor banished the Pope as well, a banishment which lasted quite some time.

However, the efforts of Athanasius, that Saint and Father of the Church, that iron and dynamic man, who revealed so much courage and tenacity in the face of the enemy, finally bore fruit. After three centuries of struggle Holy Church finally triumphed over Jewry and its heresy. What the Church and men of today urgently need are men who possess the hardness, the courage and the energy of such as Saint Athanasius, to counter the Jewish-Communist threat, which, exactly as in the case of the Jewish-Arian heresy, has brought Catholicism to the edge of the abyss.

We are certain that in this situation, as also in similar situations, the Lord God shows us His mercy so that among the hierarchies of Holy Church new Athanasiuses will appear, which the Church needs for its salvation. This is the maxim of our time in which the modern instruments of Jewry within the Church, such as false apostles, play into the hands of Communism and the “Synagogue of Satan.” They cripple the defensive powers of the Church, in order to mislead the truly faithful and to make possible the triumph of the worldly foe, just as they intend to do at the present Ecumenical Council Vatican II, called by John XXIII.

Finally we must point out that the inconstancy of Constantius is also revealed in his conduct towards Jewry. In contrast to his hostile policy, he decreed measures which favoured it; thus the law that equated the Jewish patriarchs and officials working in the service of the synagogue with the Christian clergy, exempted them from the severity of the law, as the Israelite historian Graetz himself reports to us.


What occurred to Saint Athanasius more than sixteen hundred years ago, occurs in the 20th century in greater or larger measure with many excellent defenders both of Holy Church as also of the Free World, be they clergy or laymen. Some cardinals and bishops who in a suspicious manner favour the principal enemies of Christ and his Church, namely the Jews, take them under their protection or favour the development and the triumph of the political or social movements controlled by Freemasonry and Communism, and, while they show the forces of Antichrist so much favour and support, are at the same time enraged concerning the cardinals, prelates or priests who fight with more resolution and efficacy against the beast. The activity of the “Fifth Column” of the descendants of Judas Iscariot has altered little since the time of Arius up to our days. If any Catholic regent or political leader fights so effectively against the forces of Jewry, Freemasonry or Communism that he defeats them, then these Prelates and even Cardinals appear upon the scene, in order once more to play into the hands of the hellish forces and make possible their victory which normally is beyond their reach. If the Jewish-Freemasonic or Jewish-Communist forces see themselves conquered in practice by direct action through the Catholic leaders or regents, then the “Fifth Column”, which has infiltrated into the highest honorary offices of Holy Church, hits upon the plan of unleashing a wild campaign of intrigues and Church censures, to set the entire clergy against those leaders or regents, who represent a serious hindrance for the Freemasonic or Communist triumph. And if this campaign of slander and defamation alone does not suffice to destroy the support of the said leaders or regents with the Catholic masses, then those false Apostles, of whom Saint Paul speaks, send forth a fulminant excommunication as their sharpest weapon. Thus, by undermining the prestige of such regents or leaders, they gain the support of the mass of the people in their favour to make possible as a result the triumph of Freemasonic or Communist forces. This is the secret of many victories of the forces of evil.

No comments:

Post a Comment