Untangling the Ecclesiastical Operations of the Occult
By Michael Hoffman
Today is the feast of St. Stephen on the liturgical calendar, commemorating the first martyr of the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Why did that Church of Jesus place the anniversary of a martyr’s bloody death immediately after the commemoration of His joyous birth? To remind us of the price to be exacted in this world for following the babe in the manger from Bethlehem to Calvary. What does it mean to follow Him? First and foremost, if Jesus is not the Truth then He is nothing. Therefore, to follow Him is to follow the truth wherever it leads, and however much one loses human respect, support, or life itself for having declared it.
On and on the wheels of deception roll and much of it centered on the fake reputation cultivated by the Church of Rome since the Renaissance, when it morphed from the Catholic Church into the occult Church.
One part of the propaganda campaign has been to paint Rome prior to Vatican II as the bulwark against Freemasonry and Judaism, and “the Protestants” as the enablers.
We recently received the following query from a researcher:
On Dec 26, 2016, at 7:04, R.S. wrote:
I have not read yet what you written about Benjamin Disraeli (Revisionist History Newsletter No. 85: “British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli: Head of State and Head of the Rothschild Conspiracy”), but after reading a review in Chronicles Magazine, Aug. 2016, by Patrick J. Walsh of the biography, Disraeli: The Novel Politician, by David Cesarani, I came away with the thought that Protestantism, especially that of the Church of England, is more a heresy of Judaism than it is of Catholicism.
Do you think there is any truth to that thought? Do you think that British Judaic Protestantism was what formed the impetus for British support for the creation of the state of Israel?
Our reply to R.S.
Dear Mr. S.
It’s more complicated that what you have briefly sketched. We hope Chronicles pointed out the formidable difficulty that Rothschild had in being seated in Parliament without swearing an oath to uphold Christianity. Conservative Anglicans put up a good fight, but it was Queen Victoria’s support for Disraeli that lost that battle.
There were several Anglican groups dedicated to converting Judaics to Christianity, and the foremost attack on the Talmud in the 19th century (The Talmud Tested) was written by the Rev. Dr. Alexander McCaul, an Anglican Professor of Hebrew at King’s College, London. Nothing comparable was written by any Catholic in that era.
The extent to which the occult (in the form of Freemasonry), influenced Anglicans after Disraeli, tells us much about the subsequent genesis of the Balfour Declaration in Palestine, but then the Church of Rome from the Renaissance onward was deeply enmeshed in the occult. In fact, as I hope to demonstrate in my forthcoming book (The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome), Rome’s Neoplatonic Hermeticism gave rise to Freemasonry. So who has clean hands in this arena?
(End quote from our reply to R.S.).
KNIGHTS OF MALTA
The Church of Rome and the occult are back in the news with the jockeying for power within the necoon-warmonger Knights of Malta, who are self-advertised as the defenders of Christianity against “The Muslims.” Whenever you observe the failure to distinguish between Shiite and Sunni-Wahhabist Muslims, you know you are in the realm of Zionist information-warfare (hasbara).
Though it is being presented to the public as a contest between anti-abortion and pro-abortion Knights of Malta, the actual rivalry underway takes us inside the corridors of the papal precincts where the battle is being waged between the two factions. According to Roger Peyrefitte (Chevaliers de Malte, Flammarion, Paris 1957): “...after the Second World War...the (Knights of Malta) Order was able to thwart an attempt to fuse them with the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre. This struggle came to a halt in 1953 with the sentence by a Tribunal of cardinals which recognized the sovereignty of the Order of Malta, but nonetheless affirming its dependence on the Holy See as far as concerned the religious life of the knights.
“The Order of Malta accepted the sentence, conditioning it on some points: 1) the recognition of the rights due to it as subject of international law; 2) the limitation of religious independence of the Order only to professed knights and Chaplains; 3) the exclusion of subjection to the Vatican Secretary of State.”
End quote from Prof. Roberto de Mattei; emphasis supplied.
The Knights of Malta are “sovereign.” How is that? Why is this “sovereignty” limited to members of Rome’s secret society? After the founding of the United States, every American was sovereign and this sovereignty prevailed more or less intact until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. The Knights of Malta also have recognition and rights under “international law.” How did the Church of Rome’s secret society gain these “rights” from the New World Order?
“The Holy See’s competence does not involve then the internal and international governing of the Order, but limits itself to the strictly religious sphere. At this point one could imagine that the Pope, having identified deviations of a moral and doctrinal order among the knights, had thought of intervening to straighten out the situation.”
Prof. Mattei is a so-called “traditional Catholic” (so-called because Catholic tradition is most assuredly not preserved by the Renaissance papal legacy of usurious occultism which virtually every “traditional Catholic” embraces).
“Conservative” and “traditional Catholics” have invented a new theology of papal power now that liberal Pope Francis is on the throne of Rome, whereby dissent from the pope is encouraged and limits on his power are delineated.
Before “conservative” Pope Benedict XVI abdicated however, nearly all of his papal powers were trumpeted and upheld by Right-wing Catholics. Consequently, Mattei can write the absurdity that the pope (“Holy See”) does not have the “competence” (legal authority) to govern the Malta Knights internally and internationally. What a farce. He is speaking of a papacy that once saw the pope wage war in armor at the head of whole divisions of troops and rule vast papal territories outside Vatican City. The legal authority (competence) of the pontiff in post-Renaissance Catholicism is unlimited: no matter what the “Vicar of Christ on earth” does or pronounces, he cannot be deposed by any Catholic. Now that a liberal is pope the “traditional” and “conservative” Catholics have forgotten their own history.
“It was brought to light that (Grand Chancellor) Albrecht von Boeselager, during his time as Grand Hospitaller of the Order, had abused his power, promoting the distribution of tens of thousands of condoms and contraceptives, also abortifacients, (see the reports related to the United Nations’ program against HIV/AIDS in Myanmar document), [so] the (Knights of Malta) Grand Master Matthew Festing intervened to bring an end to the scandal and asked Boeselager to resign, appealing to the vow of obedience made to him.
“The Grand Chancellor, strong in his friendship with the Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin and of his brother George’s recent appointment to the board of the IOR (Institute for the Works of Religion -- the Vatican Bank) rejected the request arrogantly, laying claim to his ‘liberal Catholic’ stance.” (End quote; emphasis supplied).
It’s fascinating to observe these mafia-like clans jockeying for power as the Vatican Secretary of State and his brother, who is on the board of the pope’s own usury bank (which bears the disingenuous name, “The Institute for Religious Works”), is lobbying to assist Grand Chancellor von Boeselager against Grand Master Matthew Festing. This of Christ?
Tribal and clan rivalries (“Never go against the family, Sonny”), invoke Pavlovian brand names to gain allies. When we read the word “liberal” in connection with Boeselager we’re supposed to automatically hiss on cue and join in the denunciation of his “arrogance.” Had he been a “conservative” Knight of Malta however, then it is likely that his defiance would be put forth as noble. Christians who take sides in these secret society affairs are lost before they take even one step into the fray.
“The creation on the part of the Secretary of State of an investigative group of five members, all of them more or less connected to Boeselager, constitutes a serious case of interference in the governing of the Order. The Holy See should limit itself to watching over the religious life through its Cardinal Patron, Cardinal Burke, appointed by Pope Francis himself. The Pope has every right to be informed with regard to the Order’s internal affairs, but it is irregular for this to take place through a commission which bypasses the pontifical representative, unless there is the desire to accuse the latter.”
“The Holy See should limit itself...” What a joke coming from a Right wing “traditional Catholic."
“Cardinal Burke” is the American Raymond Burke, who leads a movement challenging Francis over the pontiff’s view that those who are divorced without a Church annulment may in some circumstances receive the Eucharist. Burke, who enjoys parading in garb worthy of Herod the Great (the cappa magna shown at the top of the page here), is the hero of the “conservatives” who are ignorant of the fact that the Church of Rome’s “traditional Catholic” Right wing opposition to Francis is (like the pope himself), heavily implicated in defense of the Talmud and usury as we intend to show in The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome.
“A Cardinal, however, can be judged only by his peers and not by Vatican bureaucrats.”
But a liberal pope can be judged by seemingly anyone, including Roberto de Matttei? This is another joke, bordering on an insult to our intelligence.
“Equally improper is entrusting a Vatican Commission with the judgement of matters regarding not the religious life, but the governing of the Order, accusing, in this case, the Grand Master. The latter has done well to reject the bogus actions by the commission. Unfortunately not only is the procedure bogus, but the judgment in particular coming from the Vatican Authorities regarding it.” (End quote).
Under the popes who the “traditional Catholics” admire fervently, such as Leo XIII and Pius IX, words of defiance like the preceding would have been crushed, to hearty cheers from the Right. Now it is the Right that is doing the defying.
The scenes and the costumes change so fast it is difficult to keep track of the players and the play — or is that the whole point of this alchemical theatre?
In the much maligned Middle Ages, the true Catholic Church hewed to principle and dogmatic truth with unbending loyalty and rigor. Usury, situation ethics, Talmudic Judaism and the occult were suppressed. Now they flourish on the Left and the Right, in the ebb and flow of Thesis and Antithesis, empowering a Synthesis first set into motion by a certain Greek at the Council of Florence, marking the start of the new dark age for Christ’s Church.
COPYRIGHT ©MICHAEL HOFFMAN
Distributed by U-the-Reader
For further reference: Roberto de Mattei, “The Pope and Malta: A bogus commissioning,” Corrispondenza Romana, (Italy) December 24, 2016. Translated by Francesca Romana.
These columns by M. Hoffman, an independent scholar without institutional support, are made possible solely by purchases from our online store and donations from you, the reader. If you would like to see these columns appear less frequently, or disappear altogether, then do nothing and rest assured that your wish will be fulfilled.