Category: Synarchy

Abbe Roca(1830-1893)

Abbé Roca (1830-1893)

Published on by Kathy Clubb1 Comment

Canon Roca was a French priest who was ordained in 1858. He promoted the occult and was eventually excommunicated. Once defrocked, Roca priest preached his message of ‘Divine Synarchy’ in Europe and the United States. As a renegade priest, he bestowed prestige on the occult circles in which he moved – among Rosicrucians, Kabbalists, Martinists and other High Secret Societies.

Roca was a friend of the infamous Satanist, Stanislaus de Guaita, and like many occultists, was one continual search for the ‘ultimate’ initiation ritual, one that would transform him into a Christ-like being. Roca specifically tried to enlist clerics into his esoteric spirituality, believing that this would lead to an ‘evolution’ of Catholicism to its, as yet unfound, ultimate status. Along with this religious evolution, there would need to be a transformation of society.

Roca thought socialism was a helpful tool which high secret societies could use to introduce Catholics to the occult. This is because its end is an earthly Utopia, which coincides with the goal of the occultists. He realised that clerics, especially within the Vatican, would need to be indoctrinated with the false ideas of Gnosticism, Masonic Universalism and superstition so they would come to believe that the Church had lost Her way.

Roca predicted that one day a Pope would embrace the ideals of Synarchy: he referred to this man as the Magus of Synarchy. According to Athanasius (book), he proclaimed the coming of a “divine synarchy” under a Pope converted to scientific Christianity.’ (Athanasius and the Church of our Time p 34) in a world of anonymous bureaucratic institutions. He predicted that the Church would undergo “Not a reform but a revolution”. “The new church, which might not be able to retain anything of Scholastic doctrine and the original form of the former Church, will nevertheless receive consecration and canon jurisdiction from Rome.” (Athanasius and the Church of our Time p 35) He also predicted an ecumenical council at which a new liturgy would be forged.

For Roca and his conferes, ‘Christ’ is a symbol of the potential perfection which can be reached by humans through the initiations of the secret societies. It is His Humanity which they worship, believing that this Christ and His power exist within everyone of us, waiting to be realised. This is the heresy of immanentism: that we need look no further than the ‘god-within’.

Roca once stated, “My Christ is not the Christ of the Vatican!” This is something to keep in mind when trying to discern what is behind comments from prominent clerics, especially those mouthpieces of the Synod on Synodality. Though their comments may sound Catholic in places, their ‘Christ’ may not be the Jesus Christ of the Gospels.

The Church of the 'Divine Synarchy'

The Church of the ‘Divine Synarchy’

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

This is the English translation of a section of Pierre Virion’s “Mystery of Iniquity.” Taken from the Third Edition, and released during the 1970’s, M. Virion masterfully traces the crisis in the Catholic Church back to the plans of the Synarchists.

“The development of the revolution within the Church – for it is indeed a revolution – is linked to the march of international political events. Here we are in the presence of a politico-religious complex combining in its entirety the decadence of doctrinal and institutional Catholicism with the projects of a world government which, in the end, as we have said elsewhere, would be itself, at least visibly, only a universal super-church integrating national churches. In each of these two fields, parallel processes are oriented towards the same goal, so that if one is are in a hurry to follow a political trajectory ordered to their globalism, the others, under the guise of ecumenism, but in reality with a view to a versatile and Masonic dogmatic opening, are busy perfecting this revolution. 

Progress is such that they speak openly about this world government. Le Monde of February 16, 1967, citing as an example: “the rapprochement in ecumenism of the Christian churches said something about it” in advance, like Perrette in the fable, the unhoped-for advantages: no more starving people, no more epidemics, friendly exchanges and a limitation of births. 

Georges Hourdin, in Croissance des Jeunes Nations (n° 61) quoted by the Courrier Communautaire Autaire of 15 January 1967, had a geopolitical program that was more informed about the great synarchical groups: “We must accept to group the states into large regional confederations, then into a world government. It is then necessary, and very quickly, to plan births and savings”.

The pill, which, as we can see, holds a large place in globalist diplomacy, also has the good fortune to be the link between and the ecumenism of the clerics of the new Church. But this is only a small side of the homogeneity of the system, which means that the building of the New Church, as widely open to all the faithful of multiple denominations as the world government is to all the peoples of the earth, so desired, so long awaited, whose Church of Holland is today enthusiastically presented to us like the prototype, or a politico-religious enterprise.

Holland

This will be seen by reading, in Le Figaro, the articles of Abbé Laurentin on “The Dutch Catholicism of Mutation”. For him, “Holland has been a country open to the freedoms of intelligence since the first hurricanes of the sixteenth century”. He forgets to tell his readers that this was so because Holland was then a hotbed of Rosicrucians and sects. In our day, The Masonic centres are Harlem and The Hague, where, we are told, some good Fathers are forgotten, but its activity has not been weakened. That could explain this. 

But what interests the Abbé so keenly is the sudden outburst of “Christian energies”. Let us read it, in fact (emphasis added): “The first symptoms were noticeable as early as 1950. They were linked to the economic and intellectual development that changed the condition of the Dutch Catholics. The phenomenon took on considerable proportions shortly before the opening of the Vatican Council. It catalysed research and provoked immense hope, but became a disappointment from the second session of the Council”. (Le Figaro 19/2/1967)

Doesn’t Father Laurentin know that one should never talk about ropes in the house of a hanged man? So what happened “from 1950 onwards”? We remember the ‘Schumann Bomb’ which initiated the constitution of the European Coal Community in public opinion. Thus began the reputation that the ‘Father of Europe, a title’ Robert Schumann shared with Jean Monnet, whose international synarchic power and financial relations were in direct proportion to the discretion with which it surrounded them. 

Germany

Immediately, the Études of the Jesuit Fathers, in their June issue, sounded the trumpet in favour of the ‘Christian-European epic.’ Mr Robert d’Harcourt extolled in a couplet on ‘German Realism’ the profound views and talents of Mr. Adenauer. It was reported that the Chancellor, proud of the role of the Federal Republic of Germany in this affair, affirmed that, by his decisive influence, it had accompanied Robert Schumann at the London Conference and that it thus became “a factor with which international policy must count”. This “must count” was not a figure of rhetoric. 

Let us not reproach Mr Adenauer for having wanted to create Europe and, to do so, for having used forces and the audience party, the Christian Democratic Party. But from the beginning, the company had partners who were neither on its side nor in its own designs and party whose successes he attributed in 1946 to the assistance of the financier, Pferdmenges, communicated to his European peers a a dynamism led by other powers, those of the ‘Europe of the Bankers’, less zealous than he was for the cause of the Roman Church. Pferdmenges was a pious Protestant who belonged to the Salomon Oppenheim Bank of Cologne, former president of the Chamber of Commerce and of the Bankers’ Association of this city. Having helped Mr. Adenauer to form a powerful party, he was raised by him to the rank of Grand Cross.

Bankers & Bilderbergers

Pferdmenges was chairman of the Rheinische-Westfälische Credit Bank in Cologne and vice-chairman of seven associations attached to the Dresdner Bank. His death did not put an end to other support, including that of a friend Adenauer and his financial advisor: Mr. Abs, a Catholic, it seems. With Mr. Abs, we entered a circle very similar to that of the Dresdner Bank, but more powerful than he, that of the Deutsche Bank, which owns the Rheinische-Westfälische Bank in Düsseldorf. 

With Mr. Abs, again, we had full access to the ‘World Understanding’ through the channel of the famous Bilderbergers in whose meetings he took part assiduously and recently again in Cannes with a line-up of German financiers. Mr. Abs presiding over the destinies of the Western and especially of the Rhine-Westphalia Group enjoys both the confidence of the Anglo-Saxons and holds the threads that connect powerful cosmopolitan consortiums from the Hambros Bank of London, the Lazare Bank and the International Bank of London. Luxembourg, well known to Mr. Van Zeeland, Bilderberger, too, up to the Dutch giant A. K. U. and its trusts, several of which are chaired by Mr Abs and which, as everyone knows, more or less discreetly finance the so-called right-wing parties with a tendency to Catholic or Protestant. Among the Catholic organs are Volkskrant (175,000 copies), the Tydg and its chain of four daily newspapers (114,000 copies), of which there is much talk in these times of the ‘National Council’. In these perspectives, it is conceivable, in fact, as Abbé Laurentin says, that the “economic condition” of the Dutch Catholics have changed.

Luxembourg

The Schumann-Adenauer-Monnet-Gaspéri movement was born in Luxembourg. It also settled in Strasbourg. Let’s say everything immediately: the main and always discreet craftsman was Jean Monnet. The ‘Schumann bomb’ was full of hard-hitting arguments, so powerful that in Christian Democratic circles one could perceive the repercussions as far as Strasbourg where “from 1950 various personalities either in their capacity or representing different Catholic movements belonging to eleven countries “established a Catholic Secretariat for European Problems (SCPE) previously founded in Luxembourg and which defined itself as follows:

 “A technical body made available to organisations and Catholic personalities interested in European problems. Its essential purpose is therefore to establish networks between them information and documentation. The SCPE will inform and inform interested persons of the projects which may be carried out in the Discussion in the bodies called upon to work for European unity. In addition, it will prepare the files and themes of study that will facilitate the examination of European problems involving the Christian conscience and requiring the study and presence of Catholics”. 

The presidency was devolved to the president of Italian Catholic Action, Mr. Vitorino Veronese, who in 1957 became president of UNESCO celebrated the tercentenary of Comenius, the famous Rosicrucian of the sixteenth century. The direction remained with M. Baumgartner, former finance minister with whom we remained in the orbit of the Bilderbergers. Dr. Roesen, President of the Commission to the Katolikentag was delegated by the German Catholics.

The Fingerprint of Synarchy Emerges

In 1951, the Documentation Catholique listing the various European movements presented with advantage the impetus given by the Count of Coudenhove-Kalergi and the action of M. Van Zeeland. This evocation of an authentic synarchic lineage should not make us forget that, in addition, Mr. Van Zeeland “passed through more than one place to dispose of a manoeuvring mass in impressive dollars “added to the presidency of the “Economic League for European Cooperation” of which Mr Giscard d’Estaing was vice-president. The same year, the “Comité de la rue de Penthièvre” led by Mr. Boutémy, secretary general of the French Employers’ Association. He too, it was said, had “considerable funds, not all of which were of French origin, and acted energetically in connection with the international organisation led by the former Belgian minister, Mr Van Zeeland, to promote a federal status for Europe” (J. Hammer). 

In the same year again, in the year of elections, the Communists, hardly suspected of recognizing miracles, were to observe with astonishment that, with tripartism buried, their former Christian Democrat allies had suddenly become Europeans and Globalists. It was a fine piece of work in which a technical body, as the Catholic Secretariat of Strasbourg was called, was not unknown. He had undoubtedly made available to “organisations”, “personalities”, his networks, his documentation, his files and its themes of study, but the rest? His own budget must have been very heavy and such successes are expensive. The rest could not have been neglected.

On 6 March 1953, in Strasbourg, at the Congress of the ‘Europe of the Six’, what political and financial authority other than that of M. von Brentano, Minister for West Germany, could in terms almost identical to those of the Synarchic Pact, better specify the action taken? 

“The mission received from the six Foreign Ministers and the acceptance of a task that we are now leading to its conclusion, constitute a kind of silent revolution; public opinion has taken note of this work, without, however, grasping its significance”. And the result was there, vast as the ‘Europe of the Six’, as deep as the mass of the MRP of which Robert Schumann was a member and leader of the “Movement of Christian Workers for Europe” sitting in the CFTC. 

Sub-Plot to the Vatican II Council

It is therefore understandable that in such a wide environment, in such a favourable atmosphere, in a system as well as to the immense design of politicians, in a pool of people who are as well chosen in terms of its dimensions, its resources and security, the intellectuals of the Catholic Secretariat for Europe have been able, happy as fish in water, to deepen their ‘study themes’ and push their projects. In the European and globalist perspectives, the new theology perceived, now certain of achieving this, distant to the continental measure of Christian confessions and the depths of an ecumenism defying formulations of strict Catholicity. As the occultist Abbé Mélinge predicted, liberal Protestants and broad-minded Catholics could apply “at common expense” for the construction of a new church. At common expense this was, it seems, quite the case.

But if the revolution of the politicians was silent, that of the theologians was not silent enough to be able to carry the masses along in the wake of the New World and discreet enough that one did not realise the work in which one was busy in order to to try to pass on to the future Council, supported by well-known Eminences and Excellencies, the plans prepared during the “that long maturation which has led French, German, Belgian and other theologians to prepare Vatican II from afar.” (Courier January 1967). “The phenomenon took on considerable proportions shortly before the opening of the Council” (Laurentin, Le Figaro, 19-2-1967), but The effort did not relax during the sessions. It is not to the peri-conciliar literature rising like an outbreak of revolution in the press, nor to the declamations with a great deal of costly publicity of the theologians of the future that we only think. There were also in Rome, a whole organisation which constituted an instrument of propaganda and formidable pressure, offering them round tables and crossroads, which could print on the spot and distribute to the Fathers their talks and their “themes of study.”

The parish priest from Davos

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

is davos beginning to lose its appeal among the modernists? Vatican News reports.

Parish priest at Davos, Father Kurt Susak, gives his thoughts in an interview with Vatican News:

“Everywhere you hear about crises. The world is somehow in crisis mode. This World Economic Forum would somehow also lose its credibility and legitimacy if this meeting did not now also present solutions that are recognizable to the people and lead to an improvement in the many conflicts and challenges.”

Fr Susak goes on to mention the threat of war, saying that the local church community is praying that the WEF will be successful in providing solutions. Even the non-Catholic churches are praying, in a nightly ecumenical gathering known as “Silence and Prayer”. The shared intention is that “that good decisions might be made for a more just and peaceful world.”

That doesn’t sound terrible. (This does though “You would have to ask a few people now, even young people – I think most people are not that interested in whether there is a woman or a man at the altar and whether he is married or not.”)

The Vatican didn’t send any representatives to Davos this year. As the article mentions, Cardinals Peter Turkson, Michael Czerny and Pietro Parolin, have all attended over the years. (Those three men are regarded as papabile material – which is no doubt, highly coincidental.) Apparently, Bergoglio stated that: “Everything has been said, now act; that’s what it’s all about.”

Has the WEF lost its appeal for Bergoglio? (There are even some murmurs from within the ranks.) Or maybe the Vatican is just too broke to send one of its Cardinals to another fancy shindig. Davos is only 90 minutes from St Gallen – surely one of his men could hit up Davos on the way back from a clandestine meeting?

Father Susak makes a few criticism of the annual Davos event, but those are mainly limited to the infrastructure issues: traffic jams and other disruptions. Price gouging appears to be rampant during the week, as well. He mentions the high cost of security, wondering if the benefits are worth the expense.

To his credit, the article mentions that Father believes “many things are not done transparently …many things are discussed and debated behind closed doors, and that very little ultimately is made public.” However, he also takes the opportunity to fling a few stones at the “conspiracy theorists who “… fuel the resistance against the elite that gathers at the WEF.”

Oh well, he was promising for a while. Needless to say, there is no criticism about the intrinsic problem of the WEF: that it is a group of godless, unelected synarchists, whose members consider themselves to be – and are known as – the elite – and who are well on the way to creating a global dystopia.

Maybe if Fr Susak’s favourite theologian wasn’t Hans von Balthasar, he would be able to think more clearly.

But things aren’t all bad. Fr Susak tells us the Davos event presents a golden opportunity for the school children: they get to ski. “This always gives the students a great deal of pleasure,” he says, going on to remind us of the economic benefit gained by the small community during the WEF meeting. (Klaus Schwab’s latest comments on pedophilia should mean that “children”, “pleasure” and the WEF are never again mentioned in the same context.)

Anyway, Fr Susak sounds like a naive social justice type, so, who knows? Maybe next year he’ll organise an outreach to the dozens of prostitutes who are shipped in to cater to the overlords during the WEF?

An older interview with Fr Susak tells us a little more about him, though. Last year, when the WEF meeting was online, he explained that the Church has become more involved with the WEF under Pope Francis. No surprises there.

Fr Susak said that visiting Cardinals would stay with him for that week and that they gave lectures and “were involved in the whole thing.” He also mentions that some WEF delegates would attend morning Mass with them. (Why does that thought send give me shivers?)

Susak says that Klaus Schwab has also been to the Vatican to invite Pope Francis to the WEF anniversary. Parolin went instead that year, but then, perhaps he is the more powerful of the two. Sometimes it really does appear that way. Strange how Parolin has been able to keep his nose clean in that Becciu business.

Somewhat naively, Fr Susak talks about his surprise at the interest given to the Church by the WEF. He says delegates from all over the world want to see the priests, and talk to them.

“You could really experience this positive mood towards the church at all levels,” says Susak.

Someone needs to explain to this man that the WEF needs the Church both to legitimise its devious globalist agenda and as a vehicle for implementing that same agenda. We have the structure, they have the ideology. Talk about a marriage made in hell.

Good luck to you, Fr Susak. Whether you are an alpine wolf in sheep’s clothing or just a useful idiot, let’s pray that you wake up to the sublimity of your vocation and start to take your job seriously. Oh – and an exorcism of downtown Davos should be on your to-do list for this week.

Australians at Davos, 2023

Published on by Kathy Clubb2 Comments

Won’t it be grand?

Everyone who’s anyone in the world of destroying Western civilisation will be there.

I wasn’t invited. Were you?

Note that Julie Bishop received a golden ticket.

And a chap from Bunnings. (They were open all through the lockdowns, remember? Just saying.)

Peter Holmes a Court and Andrew Forrest will be there – but Gina Rinehart won’t be. Interesting.

I couldn’t see any Vatican/Holy See attendees, but that doesn’t mean that Bergoglio won’t be sending someone along.

It’s not as though they’ll be mourning recently deceased Popes Emeriti or Cardinals, is it?

(THE LIST WAS REPORTED AT AMERICAN REVEILLE)

Archbishop Vigano’s extraordinary interview with Steve Bannon

Published on by Kathy ClubbLeave a comment

Well, I think it’s extraordinary, anyway.

A prince of the Church, a man cut from the same cloth as St Peter, opines on the Great Reset, its connection with the Bergoglian pontificate and a future time of peace. It makes for wonderful reading, and I’ve included a few highlights here. [The full interview is here.]

In some of your other statements, you have spoken of a “golpe bianco” (a “silent coup”).

A “silent coup” is a coup d’état that takes place without the use of force, carried out by a government that exercises power in an unconstitutional way.

In this case the coup was carried out in all the Western nations almost simultaneously, beginning with the first years of the 1990s. For Italy, this coup began with the divestment of investee companies and the privatization of services that normally burdened the treasury, such as health and transportation services, following the directives given by high finance to Mario Draghi on June 2, 1992, on the yacht Britannia. Yes, Mario Draghi, who at the time was General Director of the Ministry of the Treasury and whom then-President of the Italian Republic Francesco Cossiga called a “cowardly businessman.” In other nations this coup took place in an analogous way, with a series of progressive transfers of sovereignty to supra-national entities like the European Commission, the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. With the introduction of the euro [in 2002], monetary sovereignty was removed from the nations adhering to the Maastricht Treaty, transferring it to the European Central Bank, which is a private bank. This bank decides the rate with which it finances national budgets, using money that these same nations have already given it. In practice, the European Central Bank demands interest on money that it only returns a penny at a time, and only on certain conditions: reforms, cuts in public spending, the imposition of laws promoting gender equality, abortion rights, the indoctrination of children, etc. The introduction of a balanced budget requirement into the [Italian] Constitution – as if the State was a company – was also part of the silent coup.

All the members of these bodies, including the same rulers who have been appointed at the recommendation of non-elected powers or have succeeded in winning election thanks to the manipulation of information, are at the same time the servants of high finance power groups or of large investment funds – some were their employees, such as Draghi of Goldman Sachs – others became employees after their term ended. Just like the drug agencies and health organizations are composed of former BigPharma employees, who often receive consulting contracts and who are paid by the very pharmaceutical companies they are supposed to be keeping an eye on.

Up until the pandemic, power was in practice still managed at least formally by individual nations, and laws were passed by Parliaments. But for the last two years, the Parliaments have been deprived of authority, and all those whom the World Economic Forum and other lobbies have succeeded in placing at the high levels of governments and international institutions have begun to legislate against the Constitution and the interests of the Nation, obeying orders given to them from on high – “from the markets,” they tell us – which in fact is made up of a very small number of multinational corporations that engulf competing companies, flatten professional skills with damage to the quality of the product, and reduce the protection and wages of workers thanks to the complicity of unions and of the Left.

In short, we are governed by a high command of usurers and speculators, from Bill Gates who invests in large farms right on the eve of the food emergency or in vaccines just before the outbreak of the pandemic, to George Soros, who speculates on the fluctuations of currencies and government bondsand along with Hunter Biden finances a bio-laboratory in Ukraine.

To think that there is no relationship between the instigators of these crimes and those who carry them out at the highest levels of national governments, the EU, and the UN is a sign of bad faith, because even a child could understand that we are held hostage by a group of technocrats who are ideologically deviant and morally corrupt. The peoples of the world need to reclaim their sovereignty, which has been usurped by the globalist elite.

The instigators of this crime show themselves proudly at the Davos Forum, at meetings of the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Group along with the rulers, prime ministers, directors of newspapers and television broadcasters, CEOs of social bankers and directors of social platforms and multinational corporations, bankers and directors of ratings agencies, presidents of foundations and self-styled philanthropists. All of these share the same agenda – which they publish on their websites – and are so confident in their own power that they affirm it with impunity – as Soros and Schwab have recently done – that it is necessary to create a narrative to be conveyed through the mainstream media, in order to make their decisions acceptable to the people. They embrace censorship and mass manipulation as instrumentum regni, and we have had proof of this both with the pandemic farce as well as with the pro-Zelensky propaganda in Ukraine.

We must understand that our rulers are traitors of our Nation who are devoted to the elimination of populations, and that all of their actions are carried out in order to cause the greatest amount of harm to citizens. It is not a problem of inexperience or inability but rather of an intentio nocendi – a deliberate intention to harm. Honest citizens find it inconceivable that those who govern them could do it with the perverse intention of undermining and destroying them, so much so that they find it very hard to believe. The main cause of this very serious problem is found in the corruption of authority along with the resigned obedience of those who are governed.

The Catholic Church also, beginning with the revolution of Vatican II and above all during the last nine years of the Bergoglian “pontificate,” has experienced the same cognitive dissonance: the faithful and the Clergy have resigned themselves to obeying mere cynical officials – who are no less corrupt and perverted than their counterparts in the deep state – although it has been evident that the purpose of the alleged “reforms” has always been the systematic destruction of the Church by its highest leaders, who are heretics and traitors. And I note that the deep church has had recourse to the same false arguments in order to pass off the doctrinal, moral, and liturgical dissolution: first of all, the false contention that those reforms were requested “from the ground up” and not imposed with force from on high. Just like the reforms planned by the World Economic Forum, the Bilderberg group, and the Trilateral are adopted by their infiltrators in the highest levels of nations and international organisms, making it appear that their plans are ratified by popular consent.

Is there any analogy between what is happening in the Catholic Church under the pontificate of Jorge Mario Bergoglio?

The deep church is an offshoot of the deep state, in a certain sense. For this reason it should not surprise us that we are witnessing the demolition of Faith and Morals in the name of ecumenism and synodality, applying liberal errors in the theological sphere; and on the other hand the transformation of the Papacy and the Roman Curia into a politburo in which ecclesiastical authority is both absolute and also released from its fidelity to the Magisterium, following the modalities of the exercise of power in a communist-type dictatorship. The law is no longer founded on Justice but rather on the convenience and utility of those who apply it: it is enough to see how harshly the clergy and faithful who are traditional are treated by the Vatican, and on the other hand with how much indulgence the Vatican praises notorious pro-abortion activists (I am thinking of Biden and Pelosi among the most striking cases) as well as the propagandists of LGBTQ ideology and gender theory. Here too, liberalism and communism have formed an alliance to demolish the institution from within, just as has happened in the civil sphere. But we know that contra legem fit, quod in fraudem legis fit – that which circumvents the law is done against the law.

Your Excellency, do you believe that the world can return to God?

The world can and must return to God: this is a necessity dictated by the divine order that the Creator has imprinted on creation. It must return to God, because only where Christ reigns can there by true justice and true peace. And the world can do this, but not in a collectivist or communitarian vision in which individuals disappear into the mass, but rather in a personal and individual vision, in which each one of us freely recognizes that nothing can be better than what Our Heavenly Father has prepared for us, since He loves us and wants to make us sharers in His glory.

If we all return to God, our Nations will also recognize His Lordship and will conform their laws to His Law. Let us pray therefore that what the Psalmist sings may be realized: Laudate Dominum omnes gentes; laudate eum omnes populi (Ps 116:1)– Praise the Lord, all you nations, praise him all you peoples. Quoniam confirmata est super nos misericordia ejus; et veritas Domini manet in æternum (Ps 116:2) – For his Mercy is confirmed upon us, and the Truth of the Lord remains forever.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
interviewed by Steve Bannon at warroom.org

Another vax-related CEO lurking at the Vatican

Published on by Kathy Clubb2 Comments

Last week, Vatican journalist Ed Pentin revealed in 2021, that Pope Francis held secret talks with the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Boula. In a less clandestine but equally alarming fashion, Bourla appeared at a health conference sponsored by the Vatican to push his toxic drugs. Now, apart from the obvious problems with Pfizer – the health risks of the “vaccine” and its reliance on aborted fetal cells – the corporation is known for its corrupt business practices such as bribery, misleading advertising and illegal drug trials. So it’s pretty clear that the Vatican should not be doing business with this outfit.

But it seems that the Vatican is making a habit of ingratiating itself to Big Pharma and its allies. Deloitte, the global accounting firm, has also been getting in on the the Vatican’s not-so-great reset act.

On January 12th, a meeting which was co-organised by Deloitte and the Vatican COVID-19 Commission took place at the Vatican. It was one of those little closed-door affairs where synarchists get together in a fabulously aesthetic location to casually decide the fate of every man, woman and child on the planet. 

It was sponsored by the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development and the theme was Prepare the future: building a regenerative, inclusive and sustainable economy.” Pope Francis apparently didn’t attend but sent a rather predictable message telling the co-organisers to “prepare the future” and reminding attendees to respect Mother Earth. Nothing remotely Catholic there.

Before we look at Deloitte, here’s a brief overview of what went down at the meeting. It is the perfect example of the way synarchy melds technology, health, economics and demographics and holds it altogether with the glue of syncretic spirituality.

Cardinal Michael Czerny, S.J., who is the acting Prefect of the Dicastery, introduced the meeting, calling for radical change:  “ … radical, holistic and systemic change so that we may all live together in peace with special care for the least among us, and in peace with our planet.” Nothing very Christian there either.

Fr. Fabio Baggio, CS, under-secretary of the Migrants and Refugees Section of the Dicastery told his listeners that “human mobility” – code for “illegal immigration” – is a good thing and needs to be factored into government policy; all we need is a dash of imagination.

Sr. Alessandra Smerilli, FMA, acting Secretary of the Dicastery, repeated one of Bergoglio’s mantras: “we are not saved alone” and Punit Renjen, CEO of Deloitte Global, drew attention to the way lockdowns improve the environment: “Proof positive that clearer air, cleaner water, and healthier ecosystems are not only possible, but probable if we act now. “

Great – climate lockdowns must be on the agenda.

Another speaker was Professor Jiang Bo-Kui, who is a senior researcher at the Taihe Institute. This is another of those globalist “think tanks”, ie, a training-ground for technocrats. Based in Beijing, this one has a very Marxist flavour, and the Professor actually used Marx and Engels as examples of the “altruistic economists” who have tried to improve the lot of the human race throughout history.

The text of the Professor’s talk is reproduced on the Taihe Institute website, so it can be studied in detail. It is rather a frightening read. The strange mixture of Communism, Buddhism and technocracy might make his theories sound reasonable to the average person, but when you know how the CCP defines “peace” and “love”, his ideas take on quite a disturbing character. Just ask the Uyghurs.

Among the the other speakers were Baroness Minouche Shafik, director of the London School of Economics, who called for a “new social contract”, and Richard Houston, CEO of Deloitte North-South Europe, who wants to “design the future of work” using digital technologies. Then there was Professor Stefano Zamagni, president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, who wants the rebooted economy to be “socially sustainable, environmentally sustainable and fraternal”. 

Now on to Deloitte. Deloitte is one of the Big Four global accounting firms, along with Ernst & Young, KPMG and PwC. Despite its successful image, this company has been found guilty of some pretty shady and shoddy business practices; eg it’s not above hiring ex-CIA operatives in order to spy on its competitors. (Most of the information on Deloitte in this article originated from Wikipedia, by the way. God bless that site.)

According to Wikipedia, Deloitte was the third-largest privately-owned company in the US in 2020. Deloitte offers consulting services to businesses, providing advice on a range of areas, such as finance, tax, legal and risk. The giant company services a host of industries, including energy, consumer, governments, financial, health, media and technology as well as governments. In other words, Deloitte is the technocrats’ technocrat. And one would expect, Deloitte is very cosy with the World Economic Forum, and is especially involved with one of its pet projects, the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

But Deloitte also has ties to the COVID “vaccine” rollout. During Trump’s days, the CDC ( the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention) paid Deloitte USD $44 million to create a vaccination administration and distribution system known as VAMS. It was meant to handle vaccine ordering, scheduling of appointments, and updating of patient records for the entire country. Unusually, there was no tender process, and even more unusually, software development on this scale is not among Deloitte’s usual services. Scandalously, (apart from the scandal inherent in pandemic hysteria, the outrageous government response, abortion-tainted toxic gene serum masquerading as “vaccines” and so on) their system is hopelessly flawed, and most jurisdictions have abandoned VAMS and created their own software or have even resorted to using pen and paper to manage their vaccination records. Presumably Deloitte has access to the medical records of the entire US population.

Worse than than even the colossal waste of money and the abysmal failure on the part of Deloitte is that fact that the company stole the software design for tracking the vaccinations from a small independent company, the Multi-State Partnership for Prevention (MSPP). The CDC none-too-innocently invited the executive director of MSPP, Tiffany Tate, to present her product, then gained access to the technical specifications, and then gave the contract and specifications to Deloitte!

Deloitte proceeded to charge the CDC more than MSPP had quoted, and even tried to hire Tiffany Tate to work for them. Ms Tate apparently did not relish the idea of being brought in to work on a project which was stolen from her by the US government and issued the CDC with a Cease and Desist order.

Another thing about the Deloitte CEO, Punit Renjen: last year, he put together an integrated health management in Haryana state in India. The programme was designed to keep hospital beds free for serious COVID cases, by allowing patients with mild to moderate symptoms to be treated at home, which in many ways is a common-sense approach to handling a pandemic. (Assuming there ever was a pandemic.) With a non-invasive approach like Renjen’s there would be no need for a vaccine – or certainly not a harmful, rushed one. Makes one think.

But since the WEF likes Renjen’s model, we know there must be something wrong with it, don’t we? And there is. Renjen’s system is a perfect example of that globalist dream to “rebuild and reinvest in more equitable and affordable healthcare infrastructure”.

Enter the classic Hegelian dialectic:

Problem: poor people are, well, poor; governments don’t care about the poor; and disease exists.

Reaction: health systems become overburdened during disease outbreaks, disproportionately affecting the poor & governments suddenly care enough to ask for help.

Solution: Deloitte saves the day by using digital technology to manage the situation. (And to manage the poor.)

Solve et coagula. Dissolve and reform. Out with the old, in with the new. Build back better.

The watchword for Deloitte’s involvement in all of this is integration: digital technology combined with health technology, combined with actual human beings plus education plus scaleability: this is the package used by Renjet to manage the health crisis in Haryana and which the WEF wants to see rolled out in other parts of the world. In other words, this is another brick in the digital passport wall of doom.

So to it all sum up: a corrupt multi-national corporation, in concert with the Vatican, puts together a syncretic, neo-Marxist conference designed to teach the rest of us how to behave virtuously and ethically. Said company was involved in a failed vaccine distribution system but feels the need to lecture the world on efficient health care systems. Will said company step in to take over the Vatican’s ailing computer system (which is just asking to be hacked?) We’ll wait and see.

One last point. Something from Solzhenitsyn came my way today that is quite apt in an article about benevolent Commies and heterodox Cardinals spouting utopian dreams:

“Marxism is…rhetoric to the effect that the world proletariat will overthrow the world bourgeoisie & the most happy & radiant society will then arise.The fantasies…break off at this point, not one of them goes any further to describe what this society would be like.”

We know why that is, don’t we? Because if people understood the society which the Overlords have planned for us, then no one would go along with their plans.

They want a digital surveillance state governed by murderous Communists who are given legitimacy by an antiChristian religion which looks for all the world like the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately, despite all the rallies and marches and websites and red-pilling that’s going on, most people still don’t understand. Which is why Deloitte and the Integral Humanists and Klaus Schwab and the rest of them will have their day – only a day, mind you – but they will have it.

They will have their day because everything is connected and the web has been spun, and the poor little flies – that’s us – are trapped with nowhere to go. But that’s okay. Because what we must never forget is we have only one job and that is to get to heaven. And fortunately, Our Lord promised us that if we persevere, then He will help us to do just that. Fiat.