B’nai B’rith is a name that pops up from time to time as one researches events surrounding the Second Vatican Council. Many sources call the group straight-out ‘Jewish Freemasons’.
B’nai B’rith coin with the numbers of the Ten Commendmants reading from right to left. Hebrew read from the right, of course, but we also know how occultists love to reverse things.
Origins
According to Masonic sources, B’nai B’rith was founded on October 13, 1843 in the USA. (Note the date – it’s a Fatima day.) The twelve founders were Jewish German immigrants who had met each other through various Masonic and Odd Fellows Lodges and other secret societies. They ostensibly wanted to provide support for immigrant families, especially those in need.
B’nai B’rith means ‘sons of the covenant.’ The group went on to become involved in a number of philanthropic ventures and created the Anti-Defamation League. It is a strong opponent of ‘anti-semitism’ and a vocal supporter of the State of Israel and also attends the UN as a non-government organization, where it lobbies for the rights of Israel.
B’nai B’rith and Ecumenism
Members of the B’nai B’rith International Council also visited John XXIII, as reported at its January 1960 meeting in Amsterdam. President Label A. Katz, reported that “the Pope’s serious intentions to guide the Catholic Church toward brotherly understanding of the Jews were unmistakable” and that Cardinals Bea and König were enthusiastic promoters of reconciliation.
Later, B’Nai B’rith recalled the desire expressed by John XXIII at the opening of the Council “to make up for millenias’ persecution of the Jews and to recall instead the common heritage.” One of the members of B’Nai B’rith suggested that religious textbooks be revised to reflect the Jews’ unhappiness at being painted as the killers of God – something they believed resulted in anti-Semitism.
“We’ll be here ’til there’s no more hate.”
B’nai B’rith and Ecclesiastical Freemasonry
There are a couple of ties between this quasi-Masonic group and some prominent clerics. One is Fr. Malachi Martin, who according to E. Michael Jones “was being paid by both B’nai B’rith and the American Jewish Committee to subvert the Catholic claim that the Jews had killed Christ.”
It is difficult to know how much truth there is to this accusation, but it is certainly true that Fr. Martin was once secretary to ecumaniac Cardinal Bea (before his apparent conversion to orthodoxy and tradition) and also that the Jews did have an agenda to make the Church repeal its historical condemnation of them.
Also linked to B’nai B’rith was Cardinal Albert Decourtray who accepted a humanitarian award from the group in 1991 for his work in promoting inter-religious relations.
I have a feeling there are lots of links that are yet to be discovered when it comes to this influential Masonic/Zionist lobby group.
For more information please see this video on Bitchute.
Angelo Roncalli has been accused of many things: of conversing with aliens, consorting with Freemasons, being installed by Freemasons, being a Freemason and of course, introducing Synarchy into the heart of the Church. Although those accusations rely on a degree of speculation, he exhibited enough obvious flaws (as evidenced by the disastrous Second Vatican Council) to conclude that his papacy struck a heavy blow to the Church.
Part of that blow came in the form of the ecumenical movement, which was a Modernist counterweight to the longstanding belief of extra ecclesiam nulla salus – there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. The document, Nostra Aetate, which was a pet project of John’s, formed the basis for the reject of extra ecclesiam. Hidden within its ambiguous text was the suggestion that non-Catholics can be saved without conversion to Catholicism. The document errs mostly by omission in that it fails to advise Catholics to evangelise their non-Catholic neighbours, thus implying that there is, in fact, salvation outside of Catholicism.
One problematic section from Nostra Aetate is given below. For more samples of its errors and a commentary, please read here.)
True, authorities of the Jews and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ (cf. Jn. 19:6); still, what happened in His passion cannot be blamed upon all the Jews then living, without distinction, nor upon the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God, as if such views followed from the holy Scriptures…
While it’s true that prior to being elected Pope, Angelo Roncalli assisted in the protection of thousands of Jewish people as they fled from persecution by the Nazis, he didn’t stop with merely defending their safety. As Pope, John went further and re-wrote the Church’s relationship with the Jews.
In large part, the Church’s relaxation of its policy towards the Jewish religion was the result of lobbying by a French Jewish historian named Jules Isaac.
Jules Isaac
In 1948, Isaac authored a book which, rather brashly, gave suggestions to Christians about how they should teach their children about the Jewish people. Called Jesus and Israel: A Call for Necessary Corrections on Christian Teaching on the Jews, the book included 18 points he believed should be enacted by the Catholic Church. (Read them here.)
Isaac secured a meeting with Pope John XXIII on June 13, 1960, two years prior to the Council, and recorded his thoughts immediately after they met. Isaac’s notes are treasured by Jewish historians.
For the meeting, Isaac was equipped with volumes of material which he believed was evidence that the Church’s teaching was anti-semitic and needed to be changed. Note that Isaac audaciously believed the had a right to change Catholic teaching. He wrote:
The problem of Catholic teaching which I attacked is infinitely more complex than that of the liturgy1. Seen from the special angle concerning Israel, it touches, if not the main ideas of faith and dogma, at least a thousand-year-old tradition, product of the Church fathers, from St. John Chrysostom to St. Augustine.
Isaac’s particular concern was the so-called “teaching of contempt” of Catholic towards Judaism, which he believed to be anti-Christian and which he believed fuelled anti-Semitism. He put forward his arguments and suggested that the Pope create a sub-committee to study his concerns. The Pope agreed to seek advice on the matter and they parted cordially.
Judaic Influence
A few months later, a group of American Jewish men from a society known as B’nai B’rith met with the Pope. B’nai B’rith (see more here) has close ties to Freeemasonry, and founded the Anti Defamation League.
At that meeting, John told them that: “You are of the Old Testament and I of the New Testament, but I hope and pray that we will come closer to the brotherhood of humanity… It gives me great pain and sorrow to see these recent events (a rash of swastika graffiti) which not only violate a natural right of human beings but destroy the understanding between brothers under God…”
That same year, he also met with a group called United Jewish Appeal, when he said: “We are all sons of the same Heavenly Father. Among us there must ever be the brightness of love and its practice. I am Joseph, your brother.”
Later in 1960, John called for those clerics preparing for the Council to add a declaration on the attitude of the Church towards the Jews. He approved the first draft, entitled Decretum de Judaeis (“Declaration on the Jews”) in November 1961, but didn’t live to see the document in its final form. That was left to Paul VI, who promulgated it as Nostrae Aetate in 1965.
Perfidious Pontiff
Yet, the Jewish question had been in John’s mind before these meetings, as back in March of 1959, during the Good Friday Liturgy, John demanded that the word, ‘perfidious’ should not be read during the prayer for the Jews.
As even such Modernists as Cardinal Bea and Henri de Lubac point out, the adjective ‘perfidious’ was included in Medieval times when its meaning was less offensive than it is today. ‘Perfidious’ originally meant ‘unbelieving’ or ‘unfaithful’ and was thus perfectly appropriate for describing the Jewish people.
[It is worth noting that when Benedict XVI allowed for wider use of the traditional Latin Mass, he only authorised the use of the 1962 Missal from which the word “perfidious” had been removed. Fr. Mawdsley has a lot more to say on this.]
Next, John attacked the Rite of Baptism, removing the necessity to “Abhor Jewish unbelief (in Jesus Christ) and reject the Hebrew error (which is that the Messiah has not yet come).”
John also ‘cancelled’ Pius XI’s prayer from 1925, the Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The words, ‘Look with Thine eyes of mercy upon the children of that stock, so long Thy Chosen People; May the blood called upon them of old, now descend on them as the waters of redemption and life,’ were now deemed to be politically incorrect.
Making Catholics Pay
John went even firther in his efforts to appease the Jews. With the assistance of the heterodox Cardinal Frings, John required that a prayer be said by German Catholics on the Feast of the Sacred Heart. It went:
“Lord, God of our Fathers! God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob! God of merry and God of solace! We confess before you: Countless men were murdered in our midst, because they belonged to the people from whom the Messiah rose up in the flesh. We pray Thee: Lead all among us who became guilty through deed, omission, or silence, that we may see the wrong and turn from it. In the spirit of heartfelt atonement, we beg for forgiveness for the sins which were committed by our fellow citizens. We beseech that the spirit of peace and reconciliation return to all homes and we pray for the peace of Israel among the nations; on the borders of its state and in our midst…”
While there was most likely a need for some German Catholics to repent of their collaboration with the Nazis, the hypocrisy of John demand is obvious. The Jews detested being held to account as a group for the crime of their forebears – putting Christ to death – yet John expected German Catholics to be held responsible, as a group, for the crime of the Nazis.
And where was the acknowledgement of the non-Jews who were persecuted under Hitler? Including thousands of priests, nuns and lay Catholics? The prayer does not mention those poor people.
Don’t Convert!
John’s commitment to non-evangelisation was well known. Secretary to John XXIII, Loris Capovilla told this story to Time Magazine:
“A young Jewish lad made the acquaintance of Giuseppe Roncalli when he was the Cardinal-Archbishop of Venice. The young man wanted to become a Catholic, but Roncalli kept putting him off. ‘Look,” he said, ‘you’re a Jew. Be a good Jew. Becoming a Catholic will kill your parents.’ The young man persisted and Roncalli finally said he could be baptized — in secret.
“Several years later (in 1961) after his parents had died, he presented himself at the Vatican to see his old mentor, now the Pope. He wanted the Pope to give him the Sacrament of Confirmation. ‘All right, all right,’ said Pope John XXIII, ‘but you have got to continue to be a good Jew, in your own community, go to the synagogue, support the Jewish schul, because, by being a Catholic, you do not become any less a Jew.”
Pope of the Jews
In 2014, Rabbi Dalin, a former professor of Ave Maria University, reminisced about John’s contribution to Catholic-Jewish relations and it was from this man that we learn John was known as the “Pope of the Jews.”
Dalin tells the story of Pope John driving through the streets of Rome on a Saturday, when he suddenly ordered his car to stop in front of Rome’s great synagogue. He got out of the car so he could bless the Jews of Rome as they were leaving: an important symbolic act that earned their gratitude.
“In doing this,” Rabbi Dalin observes, “he began to transform the history of Catholic-Jewish relations in our time, with initiatives inspired by his work on behalf of Jews during the holocaust….
… “Twentieth and 21st-century Jews will forever be indebted to Pope John XIII for his historic role in bringing about Nostra Aetate. It changed forever the relationship between Catholics and Jews.”
It is worth noting that John XXII was canonised (along with another ecumaniac, John Paul II) on the eve of Yom Hashoah, the international day of Holocaust remembrance observed in Israel and by Jews around the world.
see John XXIII’s changes to the liturgy in a later section ↩︎
Some of the problematic sections from Nostra Aetate are given below. For a fuller explanation of how this and other Vatican II documents deviate from traditional Catholic teaching, please read here.)
Tolerance for Eastern Religions
The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy (vera et sancta)in these religions. She looks with sincere respect upon those ways of conduct and of life, those rules and teachings which, though differing in many particulars from what she holds and sets forth, nevertheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men….
… Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an unspent fruitfulness of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek release from the anguish of our human condition through ascetical practices or deep meditation or a loving, trusting flight toward God….
…Buddhism in its multiple forms acknowledges the radical insufficiency of this shifting world. It teaches a path by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, can either reach a state of absolute freedom or attain supreme enlightenment by their own efforts or by higher assistance….
Nostra Aetate §2
Tolerance for Islam
Upon the Moslems, too, the Church looks with esteem. They adore one God, living and enduring, merciful and all-powerful, Maker of heaven and earth and Speaker to men (qui unicum Deum adorant etc…., homines allocutum). They strive to submit wholeheartedly even to His inscrutable decrees (cuius occultis etiam decretis toto animo se submittere student), just as did Abraham, with whom the Islamic faith is pleased to associate itself….
…”Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother1 ; at times they call on her, too, with devotion.”
… Although in the course of the centuries many quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this most sacred Synod urges all to forget the past and to strive sincerely for mutual understanding. On behalf of all mankind, let them make common cause of safeguarding and fostering social justice, moral values, peace, and freedom.
Nostra Aetate §3
JOHN PAUL II AT ASSISI IN 1986 – A LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE OF NOSTRA AETATE
Misrepresentation of the Jewish Religion
True, authorities of the Jews and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ (cf. Jn. 19:6); still, what happened in His passion cannot be blamed upon all the Jews then living, without distinction, nor upon the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God, as if such views followed from the holy Scriptures.
Nostra Aetate §4
Refuting Nostra Aetate’s Claims about Judaism
“Necessary to note here is the attempt to limit the responsibility for Deicide to a small group of quasi private individuals, whereas the Sanhedrin, the supreme religious authority, represented all of Judaism. Therefore, in the rejection of the Messiah and Son of God, it had collective responsibility for the Jewish religion and the Jewish people, and this irrefutably is stated in Holy Scripture: “And from then on, Pilate was looking for a way to release him. But the Jews cried out, saying, ‘If thou release this man, thou are no friend of Caesar; for everyone who makes himself king sets himself against Caesar'” (Jn. 19:12); and “And all of the people answered and said, ‘His blood be on us and our children'” (Mt. 27:25).
“Also striking is the statement that “the Jews should not be presented as repudiated or cursed by God, as if such views followed from the holy Scriptures.” This lacks the necessary distinction between individuals and the Jewish religion. If the subject is individual Jews, the statement is true, and is exemplified by the great number of converts from Judaism in all eras. But if the subject is Judaism as a religion, the assertion is both erroneous and illogical: erroneous, because it contradicts the evangelical texts and the Church’s constant faith from her origins. (Cf. Mt. 21:43: “Therefore I say to you, that the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and will be given to a people yielding its fruits.”) And it is illogical, because if God did not reject the Jewish religion or the Jewish people in the religious sense (which in Jesus’ time was one and the same thing), then the Old Testament has to be viewed as being still valid, and contiguous and concurrent with the New Testament. This, then, would sanction the unjustified awaiting of the Messiah, a hope still entertained by today’s Jews! All of this is a totally lying representation of Judaism and its relationship to Christianity.”2
She is honoured by Moslems as mother of a prophet, not mother of the Son of God ↩︎
It appears that it was during his time in Paris that Angelo Roncalli was earmarked by Progressives as a future pontiff. France was always important to the Synarchists and through his diplomatic work, Roncalli was able to implant the Synarchic principles of ecumenism and globalism.
GALLICA
Roncalli’s time in Paris could be said to have consolidated his reputation with the Progressive faction. Like Montini, he was the perfect blend of Modernist ideology covered by a convincing traditionalist exterior. His pious attitude towards Our Lady and other traditional devotions meant that he was accepted fairly well by conservative Catholics, even though many of his actions appeared to them to lack consistency.These paradoxical actions were evidenced in several areas: in his attitude towards leftwing politicians and known Modernists as well as his promotion of globalism and ecumenism.
One of the first photographs of Msgr Roncalli in Paris (1945)
BACKGROUND
When Roncalli was thrust into diplomatic service in France, Europe was still in the throes of the Second World War. The Vatican had, to a certain degree, lost respect on the world stage due to its support for Fascism in Italy.
In France this attitude was magnified. When Marshall Petain moved his government to Vichy in 1940, the Holy See followed with its diplomatic corps. Petain pursued a policy of cooperation with Germany and Italy while Pope Pius XII and his French bishops encouraged Catholics to support the government during the German occupation. Thus both Petain and the Church were seen as Fascist collaborators which incensed the fiercely independent French. Their suspicion and resentment simmered during the years of occupation.
Petain had also been a friend to the Synarchists, employing many in his government. Later in 1945, when Marshall Pétain was prosecuted, he was interrogated about his knowledge of the Synarchist Pact.1
De Gaulle then came to power representing the New France, leading the Resistance with help from the Allies. Although the Resistance at that time was full of Communists and Socialists, De Gaulle was personally against Communism, but he enjoyed support Stalin’s support even while Petain was still in power. In fact, De Gaulle and Georges Bidault travelled to Moscow in December 1944 to sign an agreement with Stalin promising mutual support between France and the USSR.
In June 1944, only days after setting up the base of his provisional government at Bayeux in Normandy, De Gaulle met with Pope Pius XII, explaining his policy of zero-tolerance for collaborators. The Pope urged de Gaulle to come to an agreement with Marshall Petain but he was adamant: anyone who had supported the Vichy government was going to come within his crosshairs. This included Bishops such as the aristocratic Nuncio, Monsignor Valerio Valeri whom de Gaulle believed had abetted the Petain regime.
Msgr. Valeri, Apostolic Nuncio to France, 1936 – 1944
De Gaulle pressured Pope Pius to have Monsignor Valeri replaced, but at first, Pius stood his ground, since Valeri had done nothing to warrant such action. This situation continued until August 1944, when Paris was liberated from the Germans by the Allies with De Gaulle’s Free French Forces and Petain was suddenly grabbed from his rooms in Vichy and taken by Nazi soldiers to Germany.
The final straw for de Gaulle was learning that Valeri had been on the scene soon after Petain was taken away, and he began to put even more pressure on the Pope.2 De Gaulle then embarked on a great purge which particularly persecuted Catholics, leading to the persecution, including murders, of 100,000 people. The account from Frere Michel de la Sainte Trinite is chilling:
“The bishops, who themselves were threatened, were silent while the blood of Frenchmen and Catholics flowed profusely and the prisons filled with innocent people. There was no episcopal voice to denounce the scandalous injustices of the Christian Democrats in power, as there should have been. Rome, too, was silent.”3
Pius finally relented, appointing Roncalli to take the place of Monsignor Valeri – although Roncalli was his second choice. His first choice, Archbishop Fietta, had declined on the grounds of ill-health.4
Circumstances increased the pressure on Pius, as New Year’s Day was approaching and with it, the annual message of good will which would be given to de Gaulle by the head of the Diplomatic Corps. This was Valeri’s role and with tensions running so high, Pope Pius decided to send Roncalli to Paris to replace him, leaving many perplexed at his decision, including his sostituto Tardini.
Roncalli, on the eve of his departure to France (December 1944)
SYNARCHY
Petain’s Vichy government had expanded the influence of the Synarchists, but after his defeat their leverage was diluted to a certain extent. De Gaulle was highly suspicious of the Synarchists and once in power, launched a campaign to remove the remaining offenders from his government. Unfortunately, as we will later see, in his enthusiasm for rebuilding France, de Gaulle went on to unknowingly allow many Synarchists into positions of power.
For the Synarchists, a united Europe was the first step to a world government and they had marked France as being key to their plans. Although France retained a strong anti-clerical bent, its egalitarian spirit meant that independent leaders could spontaneously come forth from the grassroots and this continued to threaten the Synarchs’ long-term goal.
A great breakthrough for the Synarchic globalists came in 1948 with the founding of the United Nations. Roncalli loved to express his support for the globalist project during his New Year’s Day Addresses to the President. By this time, Vincent Auriol – a staunch atheist – was President, and Roncalli didn’t hold back his enthusiasm for the UN.
“During these last months Paris, the real crossroads of Europe and of the whole world, has had the honour of welcoming, with her customary exquisite hospitality, the great Assembly of the United Nations, convened to organise world peace….
Certainly it has not been possible to solve all our problems, and no one ever thought that complete success could be achieved. But the atmosphere of the debates has gradually become more serene. Several principles have been asserted, all worthy of respect because they correspond to the fundamental rights of men and citizens. One might indeed sum up the innumerable speeches made at the Assembly of the United Nations in the course of these three months in the words of St Paul’s advice: ‘Test everything; hold fast what is good’.5
In his December 1949 Address to President Auriol, Roncalli again alluded to the possibility of an earthly uptopia which revealed his own humanistic philosophy. He spoke of a return to a ‘Golden Age’ when ‘respect for man’s rights and justice for all’ are achieved, as they “alone are capable of restoring the moral order.”6
It must be noted that in Roncalli’s days, by contrast with the contemporary message from the ‘synodal’ Church, the Social Kingship of Christ was loudly proclaimed as being the exalted goal and the accepted solution to all the worlds’s ills. So while his ideas might have been commonplace for a politician of his time, they were not in keeping with the message of the Church. Roncalli stated:
Last summer, when the Council of Europe met for the first time at Strasbourg, all were moved by the noble and vigorous words of the President of the French National Assembly. He recalled the words of the northern philosopher: ‘Politics must bow to moral considerations’, and appealed most fervently to all to study the most pressing problems of international life and try to realise, as M. Herriot himself has said, ‘a good part of the highest ideal ever set before any delegation : peace on earth to men of good will’.7
Roncalli then made mention of the Holy Doors which were soon to be opened for the Holy Year, possibly making an allusion to the esoteric principle of, ‘as above, so below’, saying Through this door we go, to take the ‘road that goes up’, viam ascensionis, not to descend but to ascend. And this is what, on the spiritual plane, individuals and peoples are called to do: never to descend, always to rise.8
One of the most notable of the the French parliamentarians who furthered the goals of Synarchy during Roncalli’s tenure was Robert Schuman. Schuman is rumoured to have had associations with a Synarchist, professor of law Louis Le Fur, prior to World War II, and another associate of his, Jean Monnet, who is known as the ‘Father of Europe’, is also said to have been a Synarchist.9 Interestingly, Monnet had never approved of De Gaulle – possibly due to the latter’s independence and anti-Synarchist tendencies.
From the time he became PM, Schuman began to implement various plans that pushed Europe along the path to unity. One of these was the Council of Europe, signed in May, 1949, originally by 10 member nations, with the aim of ‘facilitating the economic and social progress” of its members.
The so-called Schumann Declaration of May, 1950, placed German and French coal and steel production under a single governing authority. Others nations later joined the alliance and this eventually led to the creation of the European Economic Community, and ultimately to the European Union. Jean Monnet worked closely with Schumann on the Declaration, keeping hidden the globalist agenda at its heart.
Schumann was favourably disposed towards Angelo Roncalli. He once said that, “He is the only person in Paris in whose company one feels the physical sensation of peace.”10 The sentiment was obviously mutual: in his Address to Auriol of December 1950, Roncalli referred to an event which “had seemed to promise better things and which had shown unmistakeable signs of the pacification and elevations of men’s minds.” According the footnotes accompanying Roncalli’s Mission to Paris, Loris Capovilla tells us this event was none other than the Schumann Declaration.11
It was during his time in Paris, that Roncalli appeared on the radar of the Office of Strategic Studies (OSS) a forerunner of the CIA.13 Files referring to Roncalli which were declassified in 1978 claim he sent information to the Vatican regarding de Gaulle’s commitment to ending the Franco regime in Spain.
While it may be hard to believe that the US government had an interest in Roncalli, one need only consider his track record in Turkey, where he made a habit of embroiling himself in high-level politics. Roncalli always had the appearance of one who was not aware of his own limitations and is also on record for passing on private comments from de Gaulle of a less political nature.
Possibly the most overt example of his support for the globalist project came in1951, when Roncalli was appointed Vatican observer to UNESCO.
Now I have noticed that among the seventy diplomatic missions, of which only thirty are Catholic, those who seem most responsive to the Apostolic Nuncio’s words, when he is inspired by this religious sense, are the Ambassadors in whose lands prevails a Buddhist, Confucian or Moslem tradition.
There are then certain elementary principles of a moral or religious character which constitute the original patrimony of all peoples, and upon which an understanding must be based, as the irreplaceable foundation of a common effort to succeed in the construction of the true social and world order of justice and peace.14
July 1951 as Vatican Observer at UNESCO
During his speech to UNESCO of July 1951, addressing the ‘elders’ of UNESCO, Roncalli spoke as a member of “the oldest and most widely extended cultural organisation in the world” referring to the “God of Knowledge” as the foundation of the Church.15
“UNESCO is a great burning furnace, the sparks from which will everywhere kindle … widespread cooperation in the interests of justice, liberty and peace for all the peoples of the earth, without distinction of race, language or religion…”16
Meanwhile, Pope Pius was playing right into the globalists; hands. He had identified the greatest threat to democracy as Communism and he became convinced that the only defence against its onslaught was a united Europe.
This was unfortunate for a number of reasons: firstly because the Synarchists also wanted a united Europe; secondly, it made him prey to many devious stratagems devised by others in the name of anti-Communism; thirdly, and most significantly, because Our Lady, through her messages at Fatima, had already provided the means of defeating Communism: the Consecration of Russia and the First Saturday devotion.
OCCULT
As with his time in Turkey, rumours abound of Roncalli’s occult involvement while he was in France. Accusations of this kind are not helped by the many occult references which peppered his speech. For example, when writing to the bishop of Bergamo following his rapid move to Paris, Roncalli said: “I seemed to be seized by surprise, like Habbakuk, and transported suddenly from Istanbul to Paris by a sort of incantation.…I was stupefied.”17
Nuncio Roncalli’s first public address to the faithful also contained an esoteric reference. During an address to the Institut Catholique at the church of St. Joseph des Carmes, he connected his last post in Turkey with his new position in France by saying:
These shining points, which stand for two worlds and two forms of civilisation, Constantinople and Paris, are spanned, as it were, by a brilliant rainbow, upon which glow the last words of the prayer of Jesus, who was about to leave his disciples and wished to comfort them: ‘That they may be one’.18
Here is may be recalled that the rainbow is a symbol beloved of occultists; it certainly has no Christian relevance in this speech. In any case, Roncalli took the opportunity to recall one of his favourite projects, ecumenism: Turkey was mainly Muslim and Orthodox with Catholics in the minority.
Roncalli’s Journal from this time reveals other comments which can be interpreted as occult references, or at least as heresy. One example of this is an entry from November of 1948, where there is a cryptic reference to what Roncalli called his ‘mystical death.’ (Journal, p. 270). Mystic death, far from being an accepted stage in a soul’s progress toward spiritual union with God, is part of the heresy of Quietism. The ‘mystic death’ was one of the 68 proposition of Quietism to have been condemned by the Church in 1687. The Spanish false mystic Michael de Molinos wrote that, “The inward way leads on to a state in which passion is extinguished, sin is no more, sense is deadened, and the soul, willing only what God wills, enjoys an imperturbable peace: this is the mystic death.”19
Reading Roncalli’s Journal, it becomes clear that he believed he experienced no passions and he wrote on many occasions of his constant state of peace. He even suggested in his Journal that he never once sinned seriously against purity in his entire life.
Then in April 1950, there is another use of the phrase, ‘Know thyself’20 which as explained previously, [in a previous chapter – Ed] was a favourite maxim of Aleister Crowley.
Roncalli’s December 1952 Address to President Auriol was his final one before leaving for Venice, and it must be said, it was rather unusual. In the Address, he told a story from The Fables of Jean Fontaine. This story contained the famous maxim, ‘all paths lead to Rome’ and to their mind, twas best that each a different path should find.’ This is rather startling from a man who six years hence would find himself in Rome as Supreme Pontiff.
This is followed by a reference to the ‘Know thyself’ mentioned previously, which Roncalli explains is “inscribed on the pediment of the temple of Delphi, which in the depth and universality of its wisdom far exceeds any merely individual application, may be widely understood and practised wherever responsibility is borne in the service of the common good, and wherever men’s minds are burdened with the most acute problem of the present hour : to save peace, to save peace at all costs.”
The fable continues:
To know himself is the first task decreed By the All-mighty for his servant man. Come, stir my rivulet — can you trace Your features? “Leave it,” the Hermit cried, “to settle down — And your image will appear again!” Thus in his wisdom spake the Anchorite; Nor was his counsel giv’n in vain.”21
Auriol responds in kind, “Discord hath ever ruled the Universe; And in this world of ours I could rehearse A thousand thralls of her uneasy sway.”22
The day after the Address in which he advised his heaers to ‘know thyself’, Roncalli wrote to Cardinal Achille Lienart of Lille. As well as sending his New Year’s greetings, Roncalli mentioned his speech of the previous day, and so had yet another opportunity to use the golden words, “Know Thyself.”
Yesterday on behalf of the Diplomatic Corps I was able to offer the same wishes to the President of the Republic. It is a difficult thing to speak in that noble and mixed assembly, but La Fontaine’s last Fable gave me the opportunity to recall the Know thyself of the old sages, which is valid for all times and all places.23
Of significance here is that Lienart was rumoured to have been a Freemason; what is certain is that he was one of the prelates accused by de Gaulle of being a collaborator.24
While the above comments may be no more than ambiguities, there are more serious accusations against Roncalli. According to Mary Martinez in her book, The Undermining of the Catholic Church, a Major René Rouchette, once a member of Presidential Garde Republicaine, told her in an interview that during the mid 1940’s, he and his confreres saw Roncalli leaving the Nunciature every Thursday evening to attend meetings at the Grand Orient of France lodge.25 Certainly, Fr. Malachi Martin had no doubt that Roncalli was a Mason; he is quoted in Eglise-Eclipsee as saying Roncalli was initiated into the Lodge by Vincent Auriol.26
Roncalli’s Freemasonic membership was even suggested by French Masons themselves when in 2019, they posted on their website congratulations to Matteo Zuppi on being elevated to the Cardinalate:
“As we renew our congratulations to the new Cardinal Presbyter of Sant’Egidio already expressedherewe declare ourselves particularly pleased that the non-Freemason Matteo Zuppi, very recently named a Cardinal, wanted to significantly mention a Saint of the Church such as Pope John XXIII (our Mason Brother Angelo Roncalli in the world) to seal his new pastoral mission…”27
The Archbishop’s pro-masonic bent went well beyond having in common certain elements of their vision such as ecumenism; he also concretely advanced their sinister cause within the Church. Roncalli appointed a 33rd degree Freemason named Baron Yves Marsaudon, as head of the French branch of the Knights of Malta. This was the very order which Pius XII had suppressed and placed under investigation as he was well aware that it had become an organ of Freemasonry within the Church.28
Archbishop Roncalli’s Secretary at the Nunciature, Mons. Bruno Heim, told the Vatican’s investigator into the matter that Freemasonry was “one of the last forces of social conservation in today’s world, and, therefore, a force of religious conservation,” and that “the nunciature of Paris was working in great secret to reconcile the Catholic Church with Freemasonry.”29
As Pope, Roncalli eventually suspended all investigations into the Knights of Malta (June 24, 1961) and restored free reign to the order.
Despite his tolerance for Freemasonry, Roncalli is said to have been pleased when his Parisian friend, Antonio Coën, renounced Masonry in favour of the religion of his youth …. Judaism!30 He was also besotted with the Jewish mystic, Simone Weil, whose philosophy contained Kabbalic themes. One of Roncalli’s biographers, Paul Johnson, relates that he enjoyed the sermons of Fr. Riquet.31 Yet, Pierre Virion tells us that Fr. Riquet was deliriously enamoured by the French Freemasons!32
WORKER PRIESTS
Among the prelates who had been concerned about losing their position under de Gaulle’s purge was Cardinal Suhard of Paris. He had supported Petain and thus had been flagged as a collaborator. But after speaking to Archbishop Montini, Suhard’s mind was put at rest; Montini assured him that Roncalli was a prelate in the mould of Radini-Tadeschi rather than the more conservative Ottaviani, as he had feared.
It was apparently Suhard who coined the term aggiornamento in reference to the need for the Church to update; this term was to become the leitmotif of Roncalli’s papacy. His ideas were very progressive and Rome became concerned about his support for the increasingly left-leaning Worker Priest movement.
The worker-priests were originally a response to the collapse of faith among men returning from the forced labour camps. Some of these men could not accept the liturgy as it had always been offered, having become used to Masses that, of necessity, were offered outside of the usual church setting. Some of the incarcerated priests had taken liberties with these Masses, even offering them in the vernacular. Such priests were believed by French conservatives to be Communists, and indeed, many of them were. Suhard refused to discipline them and began to oversee the Parisian worker-priest chapter after the movement was given conditional approval by Pius XII, who had designated France a ‘mission land.’
Roncalli didn’t publicly endorse Suhard’s ideas, but also did not reveal where his loyalties really lay. Montini, however, did support those ideas from his position in Rome and as Pope Paul VI went on to approve a modified form of worker-priest.33
The pontificates of both Roncalli and Montini show the influence of the ideas of Suhard. This is important because the worker-priest movement ‘Catholicised’ the anti-Catholic revolution, and Roncalli played a significant role in ensuring that the movement was allowed to flourish when it could have been nipped in the bud.
Customarily, Roncalli remained ambivalent as he did not want to become unpopular with either side. Although he valued a traditional practise of the Faith in many respects, the worker-priests exemplified Radini-Tedeschi’s dream for Catholic Action. Radini-Tedeschi had introduced the young Roncalli to the Opera Congressi, another worker movement, when the latter became his secretary in Bergamo, although Pius X later was later to suppress the Opera due to its enthusiasm for democracy and its lack of oversight. Radini-Tedeschi had also lent his support to the Sillon – another left-leaning movement which was eventually banned by Pius and in which Roncalli took some interest.34
It is also known that Roncalli had close contact with the Specialised Catholic Action movements.35 and that he met regularly with the French leaders of the JOC. Roncalli recorded in his his diary that those were ‘particularly remarkable’ meetings.36
To conclude this section, it should be noted that by his inaction regarding these left-wing groups, the Parisian Nuncio allowed Russia to spread her errors in post-war France.
PERSONALITY
A little has already been said about how Roncalli was seen by his peers in Paris: although Robert Schumann was quite taken with him, few of the Parisian elite took him seriously. After Roncalli’s death, a Parisian Jesuit wrote that the impression he gave while Nuncio was that of being “a clown.”37
His friend, the Modernist, Dom Beauduin, told the story of how he went to visit the Nuncio, who, with an enthusiastic laugh, whisked him through the door and onto a large chair. The chair, positioned on a platform, was none other than the Papal throne, the symbol of papal authority found at every nunciature. As Fr. Villa wrote, “The future pope’s use of a symbol of the papal sovereignty as a mere prop for his own jokes was sadly more than just a misguided attempt at humour; history would show it was prophetic, as he would use the papacy to promote heretics and debase the authority of his own office.”38
Similarly, the leaders of de France’s ruling party, the MRP, (Mouvement Républicain Populaire or Popular Republican Movement) had little respect for Roncalli, regarding him as untrustworthy and unscrupulous.39 Even his friends could see through his pretence: Jacques Dumaine, head of Protocol at the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said of Roncalli that he was “more artful than subtle.”40
To give an idea of his inflated view of himself, Roncalli was asked his opinion of the plunging necklines of society ladies present at diplomatic functions. He responded that it didn’t bother him at all, “And you don’t have to worry about the imaginations of the other diplomates present – they are too busy watching my actions to get too preoccupied with these manifestations of fashion and beauty.”41
SUPPORT FOR MODERNISTS
In his role as a diplomat, Roncalli was able to move in the elegant circles of the Parisian elite. He held fine dinner parties with a range of guests including the most radical secularists. Roncalli was preoccupied with beautifying the nunciature for his many guests at a time when poverty was rife in post-war France – although he justified the expense by claiming it was for the honour of the Pope, whose representative he truly was. A letter to Secretary of State Montini (later Pope Paul VI) provides details of the elaborate decorations Roncalli commissioned for the nunciature’s dining room. There were numerous murals, including on the ceiling, as well as expensive seventeenth century tapestries: nothing was too much for Roncalli’s salon in which the secular and religious elite of Paris were regularly entertained.42
Roncalli was also known to be friends with Eduoard Herriot, an anti Catholic socialist, who was himself a fan of both Marc Sagnier and Soviet Russia.
“Nuncio in Paris, Bishop Roncalli received at an open table Edouard Herriot and Vincent Auriol, notorious Freemasons and politicians who carried out an action persecuting the Church. In the heat of a banquet, he said to them one day: “What separates us is of little importance.”. All his happiness seemed to be that of the table where he wanted above all to please.” 43
Despite his high opinion of himself, Roncalli was out of his depth in the Parisian world of sophisticated and fashionable ideas. Even his very sympathetic biographer, Peter Hebblethwaite, wrote that Roncalli “gleaned most of his knowledge of theology from conversations” and that he could not wrap his head around the ideas of the very fashionable Teilhard de Chardin.44
By and large, Roncalli played the part of loyal representative of Pope Pius, but there are many examples which reveal his early dedication to Modernism. Such is the case of the French Ambassador, Jacques Maritain.
Roncalli met with de Gaulle in January of 1945, to discuss the latter’s choice of Maritain as French ambassador to the Holy See. The philosopher Maritain was the inventor of the liberal doctrine of ‘integral humanism’, which was to have such a devastating and lasting influence on the Church. Maritain also became very close to Cardinal Montini, more of which in another chapter, where we will explore their relationship with the Communist agitator, Saul Alinsky. Maritain’s ideas were a driving force behind the MRP, the French Christian Democratic Party which formed after France was liberated. Left-leaning, the MRP was full of Catholics in support of the Republic.
Maritain is significant because his ideas were quite heretical, although this wasn’t always acknowledged either in his lifetime or afterwards. In one paper published after his death, Maritain stated his desire that Satan would be forgiven and eventually be allowed to dwell in Limbo with the unbaptised children.45 This is hardly surprising when one learns that Maritain was led to the faith by a self-confessed ‘prophet of Lucifer’ named Leon Bloy.46 Interestingly, the language of Maritain’s philosophy was to be found in the Synarchic Pact, which referred to integral humanism as “the primacy of the spiritual in our revolutionary movement.”47
While he was stationed in Paris, Roncalli’s friend from his seminary days, Buonaiuti passed away. Roncalli had never renounced his relationship with the thrice-excommunicated Buonaiuti, and wrote at the time,
“Excommunicated in 1921, declared vitandus [shunned] in January 1926, died on April 20, 1946, Holy Saturday. Therefore he died at the age of 65: in luce et in Cruce. His admirers wrote about him that he was a profoundly and intensely religious mind, clinging to Christianity with every fiber, bound with unbreakable bonds to his beloved Catholic Church. Naturally there was no clergyman to bless his remains; no churchyard that would receive his burial.”48
Another death which took place during Roncalli’s time in Paris sheds more light on his deep-seated Modernist views. After the death of Marc Sagnier, the founder of Le Sillon, Nuncio Roncalli wrote to Sagnier’s widow. In his letter of June 1950, Roncalli described the great impression her late husband had made on him almost fifty years previously, when the latter gave a speech to Young Catholic Workers.49
Roncalli made a startling reference to the “affectionate and benevolent admonition” given by Pius X to Sagnier in 1910. Far from being an “affectionate” rebuke, Pius’ condemnation of Le Sillon was extremely firm and uncompromising, albeit made in fraternal charity. Pius made it clear in no uncertain terms that the ideology of Le Sillon was socialist, unCatholic and part of a creeping apostasy that threatened to spread throughout the world “… organized in all countries for the establishment of a universal church with neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, nor a rule for the mind, nor a bridle for the passions.”50
When the axe fell on the Modernists in the form of Pius XII’s Humanae Generis, Roncalli stayed noticeably quiet. The French liberals were hit particularly hard: Chenu, Congar, de Chardin, de Lubac and others of the nouvelle theologie school and its adjacents were censured and even lost their positions. Although he had the task of passing on the orders, Roncalli bypassed most of the controversy by taking a trip and leaving the politics to others. However the thoughts of these men recurred time and time again in Roncalli’s writings once he became Pope.
ECUMENISM
While in Turkey and Greece, Roncalli had been successful at placating non-Catholics, attempting to show that Catholicism had dropped its age-old policy of extra ecclesia nulla salus – ‘there is no salvation outside the Church’.
As time went on, Roncalli’s ecumenical bent became even more evident. In 1949, for example, he interceded with Rome for the Protestant founders of a new ecumenical community. This led to permission being granted for the celebration of their liturgies in the disused Catholic Church in the little town of Taizé.51
In paradoxical contrast, although some progressives saw it as an obstacle to ecumenism, Roncalli had no problem with Pius’ declaration of the Dogma of the Assumption in August of 1950.
LEAVING PARIS
As with most chapters of Angelo Roncalli’s life, there are several conflicting versions of the motives behind his appointment as Patriarch of Venice. The most popular version claims that in late 1952, it became obvious that Cardinal Agostini, the Patriarch of Venice, was mortally ill and Pius XII asked Roncalli to accept that post, once it became vacant. Roncalli accepted and his elevation to the rank of Cardinal was subsequently announced.
There is a different account, however, which casts Roncalli in a less favourable different light. In this version, as recounted by a sympathetic biographer, Pius XII lost patience with the overly-tolerant Nuncio who refused to voice any opposition to the worker-priests. The movement had gathered so much steam that it was espousing openly Marxist ideas, with some priests taking roles as trade union leaders.52 Seen in this light, Roncalli’s appointment to Venice was a typical Roman promoveatur ut removeatur – “promote to remove”.
When in January, 1953, Roncalli was appointed Cardinal, his strong ties with France continued to be evident. Roncalli controversially received his red hat from the hands of the French leader, the Socialist Vincent Auriol. Although this special privilege had been granted to Catholic heads of state in France, it was pushing the boundaries to extend this honour to the atheist Auriol.
1 It was an ancient privilege of the Heads of State in Spain, Portugal and Austria to confer the biretta upon the new Cardinals. This custom had been interrupted in France in 1897 but was revived for Mgr Cerrctti (1925) and continued for Mgr Maglionc and Mgr Roncalli.53
The two were so close that Auriol visited Roncalli in Venice after he had been appointed Patriarch there. Roncalli embraced Auriol in the presence of many faithful who were “on their knees around us”, as he later wrote.54
Ecclesiastical Freemasonry 