The Papal Grave-Digger of Europe

By Michael Hoffman

The ideology of Neoplatonic Hermeticism gained firm purchase among members of the Catholic elite in Florence, Italy circa 1450; after that it entered the Vatican toward the end of the 15th century, and the papacy itself by 1515. It predates Hegel’s concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis by centuries. Among its most famous early Renaissance practitioners were Cosimo and Lorenzo Medici and Nicolo Machiavelli.

But what of the pope’s victory at Lepanto and the papal burning of the Talmud? Those events were akin to Pope Paul VI issuing Humane Vitae (his encyclical condemning artificial birth control) while suppressing the Tridentine Latin Mass. The thesis is visible but not the occult antithesis, and people are deceived.

The current thesis has Pope Francis announcing that a Muslim Mayor of London with connections to Sunni Wahhabist extremists, is good for Europe, while in the same interview he poses his antithesis: praising and offering support to the anti-Muslim Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

La Croix: "You received, on the past April 1st, Bp. Bernard Fellay, Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X. Is the reintegration of the Lefebvrists in the Church once again being considered?" 

Pope Francis: "In Buenos Aires, I always spoke with them. They saluted me, they asked for [my] blessing on their knees. They consider themselves Catholic. They love the Church. Bp. Fellay is a man with whom we can dialogue. It is not the case of other somewhat strange elements, such as Bp. Williamson, or others who have radicalized. I think, as I had expressed in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the path to full communion. During this Year of Mercy, it seemed that I should authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture...We dialogue well, we do a good work.” (End quote).

To  the Right wing of the Church he gives this approbation to the “traditional Catholic” SSPX. To the Left he lends his support to mass Sunni-Salafist migration to Europe. 

Pope Francis to La Croix:

"Coming back to the migrant issue, the worst form of welcome is to ‘ghettoize’them. On the contrary, it’s necessary to integrate them. In Brussels, the terrorists were Belgians, children of migrants, but they grew up in a ghetto…. I am thinking here of Pope Gregory the Great (pope from 590 – 604), who negotiated with the people known as barbarians, who were subsequently integrated. This integration is all the more necessary today since, as a result of a selfish search for well-being, Europe is experiencing the grave problem of a declining birth rate.” (End quote).

The terrorists congregate in a ghetto because their brand of Salafism demands a ghetto. It is not the fault of Europe. Some terrorists have been shown to have attended European universities often at the taxpayer’s expense, and yet still they return to their ghetto mentality and spew blood and fire upon the hand that fed them so generously.

Furthermore, Pope Gregory did not oversee the “integration” of barbarians into Europe in the sixth century. They were already there. They were mostly indigenous. Pope Gregory helped to organize the conversion of the barbarians. Only after they were converted  to Catholicism were they integrated, and not before. Don’t imagine that Francis is not familiar with these facts. He is playing a game. 

In the La Croix interview he purports to lament the declining birth rate of Europeans. This is a macabre jest. The pontiff has admonished Catholics for allegedly talking too much about abortion and contraception. He refused  to campaign against laws in Ireland and under his nose in Italy, conferring state recognition of marriage upon practicing homosexuals. He is on record referring disparagingly to Catholics with many children, saying they breed like rabbits. On May 19, on learning that pro-abortion politician Marco Pannella had died, the Papal spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi praised — in a written statement, not off the cuff —  the man who helped lead Italy in the 1970s to legalize abortion. [Rorate Caeli]

This writer will not be the only one to draw attention to the duplicity of Francis in these matters. But we will be mostly alone in raising the awareness that when the Pope issues these Janus-faced pronouncements and double-talk, he is doing so consonant with the 500-year-old tradition of Neoplatonic Hermeticism inside Rome. 

Because we have been sufficiently processed, the game is played now in the open, whereas in centuries past, of necessity it operated in a more clandestine context. In either case, the joke is on us.

Copyright©2016

Michael Hoffman's next book, “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome,” is due for publication this autumn.

____________

In the pope’s backyard Italians are becoming extinct

Michael Hoffman’s Note: Neither “Saint” Pope John Paul II nor his current successor, Pope Francis, ever truly admonished married Italian men and women for their abominably selfish attitudes toward procreation. Yes, even John-Paul “the pro-life pope” gave the Italians a Humane Vitae “lite" approach, knowing full well that Catholic confessors in the West were exculpating married couples who practiced contraception. John Paulphiles can produce — if they can — contrary evidence in our comments section (below). We’d love to see it, but we predict that all they will be able to come up with is some token wrist-slapping from JP-II. This is one reason why, upon his death, Italians demanded immediate sainthood for Pope John Paul —  he did not raise the spectre of disaster and damnation toward those Italians who do not possess enough spark to reproduce themselves. Had the Italians "denied the Holocaust” however, then you can be certain he would have invoked the wrath of God upon them.

With Pope Francis, as a result of his notorious “Who am I to judge?” maxim, counseling against contraception is not a high priority. A recent pro-life march and meeting in Rome was dismally attended by a total of exactly one Catholic cardinal or bishop, Cardinal Burke. The pope and the rest of the hierarchy were absent. They have more important priorities that engage their passionate concerns, as for example, civil unions for sodomites, which is at the top of their list; being popular with the world and its media is also exceedingly important to them.

The hierarchy of the Church of Rome, starting with the current pope, cannot be said to be other than coffin riders sailing over the extinction of the Italian nation with a wink and a nod. No doubt they feel that North African immigrants will make better citizens of Italy than the Italians themselves. Perhaps they are right. North Africans do have enough children sufficient to reproduce themselves. Meanwhile the Wall Street Journal reports that Italy “already has around 150 over-65s for every 100 people under 14.”

Arrivederci Italia!

click on the article to read it full-size
Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2014, p. A11.

***

Questions for Hoffman concerning his book about usury

Questions on Usury for Michael Hoffman

From D.L., Omaha, Nebraska:

Michael,

I have just completed reading your excellent book Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not, and am re-reading and researching various sections for further clarity. Here are questions and comments which I hope you can assist me with in whatever spare time may allow.

1. If the popes from 1515 were manifest heretics on the issue of allowing, condoning and promoting the practice of usury in any form whatsoever, from the standpoint of it being mortally sinful, then the Catholic Church was absent of s valid papacy all these centuries.  Exceptions most likely, would be popes who served brief reigns e.g.: Adrian VI, Marcellus II, Urban VII, Innocent IX and Leo XI.

2. Pius VIII served only 20 months and near the end of his office was troubled by revolutionary activities in France and Italy.  Could these events have led to a hasty and not well thought out decision given to the Bishop of Rheims?  Perhaps those advisors in the Curia advised him falsely, and through ignorance and bad trust/judgment he sinned lacking due diligence, but not by way of heresy?

3. Do you see exceptions of heresy with regard to Pius VI and Pius X?  The Church cannot err in Canonizations which would violate Her principle of Indefectibility.

4. Trent and Vatican I would have been promulgated by two antipopes, Pius V and Pius IX.  Do you see these councils partially or entirely illegitimate?

Dear Mr. L:

I write history. I am not a theologian, nor do I contemplate the theological consequences of my historical research, which is based solely on the pursuit of truth wherever it leads, on the basis that where there is truth there is Jesus Christ. If my book Usury in Christendom is true, then it is of Christ.

Remaining faithful to the True Church of All Time, the ecclesia of SS. Basil, Chrysostom, Aquinas, Anthony of Padua, King Edward the Confessor, Pope Innocent IV, etc., does not make one a traitor. Treason to traitors is no treason. The Catholic Church cannot nullify sacred dogma, or betray Christ, but rather, the post-Renaissance Church of Rome, or "newchurch," as some term it, appears to have done so. The bane of Christian society is their situation ethics, their substitution of human financial standards relative to the circumstances and context of the times, for immutable divine law against interest on loans. No pope after Leo X reversed the tide of usury in the Church. Even the famous Vix Pervenit encyclical of Benedict XIV consisted of toothless semantics. It had no provision for enforcement. It left a loophole for certain types of usury. Usury among “Catholics" flourished in the wake of it.

• Any pope after Leo X had the power to enforce the immemorial Catholic dogma on what usury is and the mortal sinfulness of it. 

• Any pope after Leo X could have promulgated the following as law, as it had been law for fifteen hundred years: 

"All interest on loans of money is a grave transgression against the law of God. In order to obtain absolution, reception of the Eucharist and a Catholic burial, all usurers must confess their mortal sin, avoid the near occasion of sin by halting their involvement in usurious trade and operations, and make restitution for the interest they took. Impenitent, practicing usurers are not to receive the Eucharist and are to be refused a Catholic burial. In Catholic nations, the civil authorities are urged to seize the assets of usurers after death to repay interest to debtors. Obstinate usurers are excommunicated." 

No such restorative statement of enforcement of the eternal Law of God (or anything approximating it), has ever been issued in the past 500 years (1515 to 2015) by any pope since usurious operations were incrementally empowered beginning with Medici Pope Leo X's Bull, Inter multiplices of May 4, 1515. 

Ergo, despite whatever pious, nostalgic or sentimental feelings one may have for any pope from Leo X onward, it grieves me to say that whatever good those popes may have done cannot override their condonation of the worst of all sins. By their papal permission (by silence, inaction, apathy or active conspiracy) for the love of money that is usury --said love being, according to the Gospel the root of all evil (as it is, by its sterility and the plague of situation ethics that must accompany it in order to justify it) they acted as wolves, not shepherds .

We cannot say "he was a good pope but he permitted adultery. He was a good pope but he permitted idolatry. He was a good pope but he allowed for robbery." Any papal relaxation of the divine law against those grave transgressions renders the pontiff involved a devil in the shape of a pontiff.

This  is true as well as for the centuries of gradualism which resulted, in 1830 in the pontificate of Pius VIII, in de facto permission for the root of all evil, the love of money as weaponized by interest on loans of money, which is what very obviously motivated the Renaissance Church of Rome in letting the “Catholic" usurers ply their trade.

Moreover, in the wake of the exposure of the child molestation rings in the Catholic hierarchy, which predate Vatican II, we must wonder about the extent to which even supposed "hero" popes of the past may have shielded malefactors by means of the terrible secrecy in which the Vatican bureaucracy and curia have dwelled these many centuries. Many questions are now being raised of the extent of sodomy in the hierarchy of Rome long before Vatican II. The true history of the papacy from the Renaissance onward, has yet to be written.

As for Pius X, recall that the Code of Canon Law of 1917, which permitted usury, though promulgated by Benedict XV, was largely composed during Pope Pius X's papacy. As for the infallibility of canonizations, I wonder. Alphonsus Liguori argued for the rights of those who charge interest on loans, and advocated a most devious form of lying, and he is esteemed by "traditionalists" as one of the most eminent and holy of all Catholic saints.

The winds of truth are only beginning to blow through the Church of Rome. Let us hope that the sum effect is more than the Cryptocracy's notorious Revelation of the Method.

Michael Hoffman
Copyright © 2013 and 2015. All Rights Reserved

For Further Research:
500 Years Ago the Reign of the Loansharks Began

Independent History and Research
Box 849 • Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 83816 USA

___________