by T. Stanfill Benns | Apr 3, 2025 | New Blog

+Fourth Thursday in Lent+
Prayer Society Intention for April, Month of the Holy Ghost
“O Holy Ghost, Creator, mercifully assist Thy Catholic Church, and by Thy heavenly power strengthen and establish her against the assaults of all Her enemies.” (Raccolta)
Fr. Doyle’s Reflections on the Passion, Part 4
Gesthemani (cont’d):
“…Our Lord goes back a second time to pray. This time He is even more alone than before. He prays to His heavenly Father, and His heavenly Father turns a deaf ear to His petition. His Apostles are sleeping again, and yet He prays alone. He is now in a state of supreme desolation and yet He prays. He is in a state of complete dereliction but He prays on. Learn from this lesson to pray even under the most adverse circumstances.
Consider the fact that Christ persevered in His prayer. Already He prayed to His Father saying: “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from Me” (Mt. 26:30).The second prayer of our Lord was a repetition of the first, for He said: “My Father, if this cup cannot pass away unless I drink it, Thy will be done” (Mt.26:42).
The third prayer was couched in the same words – a prayer more fervent, more earnest then any uttered by any man who ever lived on this earth – yet His Father, it seemed, did not listen to His petition. Christ did not grow impatient, He calmly and resignedly adds: “Not My will but Thine be done” (Lk. 22:42).
What a great lesson in this for all of us! If the Son of God must plead three times for the fulfillment of His prayer, and does so without a trace of bitterness, why are we so depressed when our prayers are not immediately answered? St. Monica prayed for eighteen years for her son Augustine’s conversion, but how richly her perseverance was rewarded. “We wait a whole year,” says St. Francis de Sales, “before the seed we sow in the ground bears fruit; and are we more impatient in regard to the fruits of our prayers?”
There is great consolation for all of us in the refusal of the Father to hear the petition of His adorable son. God the Father refused the most perfect, the most precious prayer ever uttered on this earth – but he did so to prove His love for sinful man. For the sake of sinful man He will not answer the prayer of His own Son, because had God acted otherwise, we would have all been lost. See the reason behind God’s refusal to answer our prayers – He always has the greater good in view: From now on, never complain if your prayers are unanswered. Just keep right on praying. Say your rosary today for the grace of perseverance
Our consideration of the triple prayer of our Blessed Lord in the Garden of Olives should have convinced us of the merit and necessity of continued prayer when we are afraid, downcast, depressed, tempted, or forsaken.
There were numerous other occasions when Christ addressed His petitions to His eternal Father and the response was immediate. The raising of Lazarus is a case in point. In the Garden of Olives, however, the Master prayed three times and His prayer was unanswered. We have seen that had God the Father answered Christ’s prayer and “let the cup pass away” from Him, the world might not have been redeemed. When God does not answer prayer, it is for the greater good.
In the Old Testament we read that the prophet Elias, when he asked God to confound the pagan prophets of Baal by a miracle, hardly had spoken his prayer when a miraculous fire came down from heaven and consumed a holocaust set on the altar, and even burned water in the trench. When the same prophet Elias prayed for rain for God’s people, he had to repeat his prayer not once, twice, or three times, but seven times (Kings 18:44).When God refuses to answer prayer it is for a greater good. When He delays the answer, it is to put the endurance of the suppliant to a test.
The Jews in Bethulia prayed all night, desiring the help of the God of Israel when Holofernes besieged their city, but the more they prayed, the more desperate the situation appeared. Yet they persevered, and God sent them a deliverer in Judith. Another important lesson which we can learn from our Lord’s prayer in Gethsemani is this, that all our petitions to God should close with an acquiescence to the divine will. Hear our Lord say in the depths of His agony – “Not my will but thine be done” (Lk. 22:42)” — (end of Fr. Doyle quotes).
Introduction
“… His Apostles are sleeping again” (Fr. Doyle). Even though it has been proven that LibTrad pseudo-clergy were never valid (see VAS article HERE) and that the entire Traditionalist movement was only the continuation of Masonic infiltration to seduce the remaining faithful, some continue to sleep and others stubbornly refuse to believe. A recent discovery below offers further proofs of the Masonic origins of ALL LIB-TRAD SECTS and explains why so many among these sects are anti-Semitic in their views, despite the condemnations of the Roman Pontiffs. Owing to the Nazi persecution, Popes Pius XI and Pius XII bound Catholics to refrain from hatred of the Jews for their part in Christ’s death, and by word and example taught us what our attitude toward them should be.
The CMRI pseudo-bishop Mark Pivarunas, (“consecrated” by the Mexican Thuc bishop Moises Carmona), received an official letter on March 1, 2024, confirming the Masonic origins of the priests serving Traditionalists in Mexico. This jaw-dropping revelation from one of Pivarunas own “priests” seems not to have been addressed by Pivarunas publicly, as a search of the CMRI site shows no mention of the organization, (Los TECOS), in question. While the letter does date the existence of Los TECOS to the early 1900s, it fails to mention that this sect was well known to Fr. Joaquin Saenz y Arriaga, the founder of sedevacantism, who served as chaplain for the group in the 1950s-60s. The translator of one of Arriaga’s works, The New Montinian Church, was quoted in the article HERE, describing Arriaga as a member of yet another secret society common to Traditionalists, this one better geared to the Caucasian population: the Sovereign Order of St. John, Knights of Jerusalem (OSJ).
Wikipedia says under sedevacantism: “The earliest example [of sedevacantism] is from a group of traditionalist Catholics in Mexico associated with the radical right secret society Los TECOS based in Guadalajara, in particular their spiritual director, Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, a Jesuit priest, the main figure associated with presenting this. In 1965, at a private meeting in the house of Anacleto González Guerrero (son of the Cristero martyr Anacleto González Flores), Los TECOS leaders proposed the motion that Paul VI (Giovanni Montini) was a crypto-Jew and an illegitimate Pope, that this line should be officially adopted as the position of Mexican traditionalists.” Arriaga also was the author of a widely quoted collaborative work enthusiastically endorsed and sold across the Internet by all manner of Traditionalist groups — The Plot Against the Church, by “Maurice Pinay.” (Anacleto González Guerrero, who corresponded with this author in the early 1980s as Anacleto Gonzalez Flores, later claimed to have written the bulk of the book for Saenz.)
This work blamed primarily the Jews as the masterminds behind the destruction of the Church, as well as the puppet-masters behind Freemasonry. Yet the extent of the influence of certain Jews and their predominance in the Masonic sect and other secret societies has not been determined by the Church. The Plot Against the Church makes no mention of the pleas by both Popes Pius XI and Pius XII to refrain from anything that would amount to the physical persecution of the Jews or lead to their persecution. In their The Hidden Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, (1998) Georges Passelecq and Bernard Suchecky wrote about Pope Pius XI’s last encyclical that was never published, Humani Generis Unitas. This encyclical, written on the eve of WWII, is best summarized below:
- The Church upholds and defends Her right to warn Her children against those actively hostile to the Christian religion, especially, “misguided souls, whether of the Jewish people or other origin, who ally themselves with or promote” revolutionary movements aimed at the destruction of society and the Catholic Church.
- Alternating mildness and zeal on the part of the popes over the centuries in addressing this anti-Catholic attitude does not reflect “any interior change in the Church’s policy,” which is easily found confirmed in “the conduct of bishops…and Her ecumenical councils,” AND ESPECIALLY THE CONDUCT OF THE HOLY SEE.
- Under the specific heading “Anti-Semitism,” Pope Pius XI states: “Such persecutory methods are totally at variance with the true spirit of the Catholic Church.” Quoting a decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office dated March 5, 1928, the pope points to the Church’s professed love for the Jews and desire for their salvation. The decree contains a resolution on the part of the papacy to continue to protect the Jews against unjust oppression and open anti-Semitism.
Pope Pius XII later demonstrated his solicitude for the Jews by his conduct during WWII, saving countless Jews from certain death at the hands of the Nazis. With this and the above in mind, we present the following, which in and of itself should be enough to convince any rational human being that the Traditional movement was only a continuation of the penetration of secret societies into the very heart of the Church. In the late 1990s, letters written and signed by various Mexican authors were sent from Mexico to Traditionalist pseudo-clergy worldwide warning that Los TECOS pseudo-clergy were Masonic and had been form the beginning.
These letters were circulated in 2000 from the office of Fr. Paul Schoonbroodt (1933–2012, a parish priest of Steffeshausen, Belgium), with a written introduction by his secretary Amelia Schmid. They were then forwarded to a friend who forwarded them to me. Although these letters only date back to 2000, the Masonic influence propelling the Traditionalist movement goes back to its very beginning as explained in the link in paragraph 2 above. That they were suppressed should in itself be enough to rouse the followers of LibTrad pseudo-clergy from their sinful sleep. But will it?
Please note that the letters below do not limit the Masonic contamination to the CMRI, or to the group referred to in the Los TECOS letters. In fact in the last two blogs we have seen how such individuals as the Gnostic Rama Coomeraswamy and indirectly, E. Michael Jones, have spread their heresies throughout LibTrad sects. Others, such as the former Protestant minister Gerry Matatics — in a series of interviews with ISOC founder Judith Sharpe, titled The Plot Against the Church, based partly on Saenz’s work — have played their own part in promoting the views of heretics and schismatics. Both Coomeraswamy and Matatics taught students in “Traditionalist seminaries.” One cannot help but wonder if they themselves were not affiliated with the OSJ and Los TECOS or some other unknown secret society, given their activities.
Introduction to the Secret Society, Tecos
“These four “open letters” are not bound by any law of copyright. In fact Bishop Jose F. Urbino Aznar from Merida, Yucatan, exhorts all to read these letters, to broadcast them, to send them to other countries or to translate them so that all concerned would be informed and warned! He writes, at the end of his Letter IV, that, “IF TRADITIONALISTS DO NOTHING, THEY HELP THE TECOS TO INFILTRATE AND SABOTAGE.”
“The purpose of these pages is to war against the presence of “Marrano’s” in Traditionalist Sede-vacantists groups today. These “false brothers” are continuing the work of the Spanish Marrano’s in the 15th Century, and 40 years after the Vatican II revolution in the Church, their aim is to infiltrate, subvert, and over-throw the last remaining bastions of Catholic Traditionalism. The “Tecos” and stemming from it… the “Trento” movements in Mexico, will be studied here but their subsidiaries in other countries have different names: i.e., “Una Voce” in Munich, Germany whose leader is Dr. Eberhard Heller, the editor of the subversive, pseudo-traditionalistic journal, “Einsicht”; and “Trident”, a Czechoslovakian “traditionalist” journal, edited by Dr. Klomineky; it is also affiliated with Tecos.
“Trento is a branch of Tecos. The rank-and-file members of Tecos would appear to be Catholics militating against Freemasonic influences; quite anti-Communist! But its leaders are very wealthy Jewish Freemasons who pretendthey’re Catholics and Mexican patriots. Since Vatican II, they even pretend to be sedevacantist Traditionalists, in order to be better accepted by the latter; alas, they are “MARRANOS”!
“Who are the Mexican Tecos leaders? They stem from two related families: Leano and Alvarez del Castillo. They rule this Secret Society but delegate their power to their subordinates, yet they exert tyrannical control. For example, Bishop Martin Davila Gandara (of the Trento Priests Union) is not free to act independently. Everything he does is controlled ‘down to the last detail’. This bishop and all Trento priests and seminarians are official members of the Tecos! This is a pre-requisite to be lavishly financed by the super-rich family — Leano Alvarex del Castillo. Unfortunately, the hundreds of millions of dollars they possess come from drug-smuggling operations, investments in very luxurious hotels and easiness, illegal confiscation of property (aided and abetted by corrupt police, easily bribed). They are also the main shareholders in the Mexican TELEVlSA TV enterprise, a springboard for Satanical programs. We unconditionally agree to the above.
Signed: Sergio Ruiz Vallejo, Rafael Lira, Jose de Jesus Beecara, R. Alvaro Reyes C.
(All emphasis in this quote and what follows below is added by the author. The four Los Tecos letters detailing the above accusations are available on request.)
Excerpts from Los TECOS letter to Pivarunas
https://archive.org/details/letter-to-bishop-pivarunas-in-english
La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico, on March 1, 2024
(Prepared by “Fr.” Hernán Arturo Vergara Monroy)
- This document is prepared at the request of Bishop Mark Antony Pivarunas, as instructed by Father Carlos Borja.
- Due to the gravity of the matter, I request that this issue be handled with absolute discretion, asking the Lord Bishop to safeguard the document to prevent it from being stolen and disseminated, causing serious harm to the spiritual well-being of souls.
- In this document, only a small sample of the matter is discussed…The colloquial name for the sworn organization is “Los Tecos”, but its internal title is “Legion of Anti-Communist Youths of Mexico,” for God and for the homeland,” outwardly promoting values, Catholic faith, and a life centered around God. However, in practice, their actions align with the will of a faceless supreme power, which seems to disregard God’s law.
- The man who appears as the founder of this organization is named Carlos Cuesta Gallardo. He was born in the city of Guadalajara, Jalisco, on August 22, 1911. His parents were Francisco Luis Cuesta Gallardo and Maria Elena Gallardo Rojas. The family was extremely wealthy, with close relatives holding high positions in the government. Interestingly, there are Hebrew customs within this family, but there remains an absolute silence regarding their genealogy.
- Around 1934, an organization was founded, with one of its ideologues and leaders being Father Manuel Figueroa Luna S.J. The organization operated under catalogued and mandatory methods, including oaths, blind obedience, loyalty, and secrecy. Members swore an oath in the name of God to maintain absolute silence about the organization’s existence, names, agreements, addresses, structure, and programs. They also pledged obedience to the “Army of God.” whose leader remained unknown to almost everyone. According to its main proponents, the organization’s purpose was to counter the Judaeo-Masonic-Communist conspiracy. To avoid detection, members used pseudonyms, ensuring that if internal documents were confiscated by the police, their identities would remain hidden.
- Regularly, young people from the age of twelve are recruited and trained to align their thinking with the Organization. Based on their proselytism efforts, they can ascend to become group leaders. These young people are recruited by seemingly harmless external groups that appear beneficial to initiates. They are then admitted to a preliminary group and after undergoing preparation and testing, they ascend to the base group.
- The concept of “pureza de sangre” (purity of blood) is something that they claim involves separating Jewish, Masonic, or anti-Christian elements.
- MY PROPOSAL IS THAT THE PRIESTLY SOCIETY OF TRENTO SHOULD DISAPPEAR FOR HAVING BEEN BORN IN AN ANTI-CHRISTIAN ORGANIZATION…
- The banner or emblem of the organization has a double-headed eagle in the center, similar to the symbol of the 33rd degree of Freemasonry. Isn’t this enough evidence of what this organization is? Just like the two Masonic columns that are found in the presbytery of the church of San Agustin, in the little hill of Guadalajara, an emblematic church of the organization.
- They have several oaths, I write only one consigned in the traditional liturgy: *I (name of the oath-taker) swear by God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, creator of the universe and everything that exists, swearing without mental reservations of any kind, to be loyal to God and to the Legion of Anti-Communist Youth of Mexico, never to betray or fight it and to keep absolute secrecy with strangers to said movement of its existence, of the names of the components and leaders, of the matters discussed in its meetings and of everything that relates to it. Just as I will never act within said order accepting slogans, orders or simple suggestions from people or organizations strange to this organization. I also swear by God, to consider the Legion of Anti- Communist Youth of Mexico, as the primary organization in the temporal order subordinating all my political or social activities to the supreme direction of this movement, whatever the place where I carry out my activities, if I do not do so, may the Legion of Anti-Communist Youth of Mexico punish me with the death of traitors.”
- “KEEP ABSOLUTE SECRECY WITH STRANGERS TO THIS ASSOCIATION, OF ITS EXISTENCE, OF THE IDENTITY OF ITS LEADERS AND ITS MEMBERS. OF THE MATTERS DISCUSSED IN ITS MEETINGS AND IN GENERAL OF EVERYTHING RELATED TO IT. ONLY THOSE WHO RECEIVE ORDERS TO REVEAL IT, ISSUED BY THE SUPERIORITY THROUGH THE ORGANIZER-INSPECTOR, MAY REVEAL TO STRANGERS.” (Regulations of the organization, third title, second chapter, article 34, fraction I.)
- “In order that there may be no room for error when it is to be determined which of these pernicious sects are subject to censures, and which are only prohibited, it is certain in the first place that they are punished with excommunication latae sententiae, the Masonic and other sects of the same kind…” Instruction of the Holy Office of May 10, 1884. DZ 1860.
- “THOSE WHO GIVE THEIR NAME TO THE MASONIC SECT OR OTHER ASSOCIATIONS OF THE SAME KIND THAT PLOT AGAINST THE CHURCH OR AGAINST LEGITIMATE CIVIL POWERS, INCUR IPSO FACTO EXCOMMUNICATION SIMPLY RESERVED TO THE APOSTOLIC SEE.” Code of Canon Law, Canon 2335.
- Commentary on Canon 2335: “According to an instruction from the Holy Office of May 10, 1884, all associations that require their affiliates to swear an oath of absolute secrecy and to blindly obey everything to leaders are prohibited.”
- THEY EDUCATE AND SYSTEMATICALLY FORM A STANCE OF HATRED AGAINST JEWS FOR BEING JEWS, against Masons for being Masons; In this sense, the truth about the Jewish people must be preached, INSTRUCTING THE TRUTH THAT IS NOT TO INSTILL HATRED OR RESENTMENT, but the knowledge that prevents us from the influence of a people educated in the perversity of the Synagogue of Satan: the seriousness of this system of irrational hatred, is the following: Who can or defines who is a Jew? Well, the organization, which does not present evidence, only the definition in the manner of the Holy Office, in this way, the organization can enrage its addicts with just one order. Finally, it is one more means of manipulation… The organization that operates from the Autonomous University of Guadalajara, its leaders and owners, have not explained the legality of the wealth they have, in addition to the fact that, in 1962, the Rockefeller Foundation donated a large amount of money.
(Seminary of the Sacred Hearts)
- …The aforementioned names (Davila Gandara and Perez Gomez) were “piously” subjected to a “brainwashing” in a short time and in a sui generis or Frankenstein preparation, taken to the sacred orders with the tranquility of having the support of the organization. (On Oct. 14, 1998, a two-thirds majority of priests elected Dávila for episcopal consecration. Dávila was consecrated a bishop May 11, 1999, byPivarunasand Dolan in the Temple of the Divine Providence.)
- The missions and churches that were established with the fathers of Manuel Lopez or the Trento priestly society, are precisely places where the organization operates, having the other places, especially the south of the country, as a second level.
- A priest wishes to testify, about how before ordaining him, you, Bishop Pivarunas, took him before Manuel López to perform a ceremony with an oath to obey God in the person of this gentleman, an indispensable requirement for ordination.
- All the seminarians were sent for a month to preparation for the organization, which was actually brainwashing.
- “Strength was confused with contempt, loyalty with servility, obedience to man with disobedience to God, humility with people without the ability to think contrary to the triple authority.
- “Let no one thinks that it is permissible for any reason to give his name to the Masonic sect, if he professes to be a Catholic and values the salvation of his soul as he should.”, (Pope Leo XIII, encyclical Humanum genus, DZ 1859).
- “Apart from these, there are other prohibited sects that must be avoided under penalty of serious guilt, among which we must mainly count all those that require their followers by oath not to reveal the secret to anyone… (Instruction of the Holy Office of May 10, 1884; DZ 1861).
Summary
Vergaro-Monroy and Borja took a great risk in making this information available to the public and for that they should be commended. But Vergaro/Borja do not connect the dots, which go back much further than they are willing to admit — all the way back to Saenz and the founding of Traditionalism. In 1965, Fr. Gommar DePauw founded the Catholic Traditionalist Movement in Long Island, New York. In that same year, Fr. Saenz and Anacleto Gonzalez Guerrero (Flores), already both members of the Los TECOS secret society, founded the sedevacantist movement. Both Saenz and DePauw were members of the OSJ, (Sovereign Order of St. John, Knights of Jerusalem — Shickshinny branch, not Malta branch). The OSJ organization then set up its own Trad mass centers across the U.S., referred to as priories.
Lefebvre, already tagged as ordained and consecrated by a Freemason, was reportedly a member and even the head of the OSJ, both in the U.S. and France. He also is most likely connected with the scandalous “Catholic” secret society The Priory of Sion, (supposedly defunct, but this is only a smokescreen) with his seminary headquartered in Sion, France and all his branch organizations named priories. DePauw, Schuckhardt (original founder of Pivarunas’ CMRI) and other LibTrad sects also designated their various “branches” as priories. This is no coincidence; the Masonic connection is clear.
Probably the most important part of Vergano’s letter is the admission that Los TECOS (and all those infected with its perverse philosophy) “…EDUCATE AND SYSTEMATICALLY FORM A STANCE OF HATRED AGAINST JEWS FOR BEING JEWS, against Masons for being Masons; In this sense, the truth about the Jewish people must be preached, instructing the truth that is not to instill hatred or resentment…” This certainly explains the attitude of LibTrads towards the Jews today, but there is more. According to the Wikipedia article on Los TECOS: “…they built up connections with members of the Arab League, such as the Saudis, with whom they shared a mutual opposition to Zionism and an obsession with “Jewish conspiracies”… While condemning the United Nations in their own private works as part of the “Masonic conspiracy”, they, at the same time, used UNESCO’s World University Organization to build up relations with radical right, anti-communist, anti-masonic and antisemitic forces across the world throughout the 1950s…
“[They then] funneled some of these funds into their own political activities. The biggest windfall was secured in 1962, according to Stefan Thomas Possony, who said that “… Guadalajara UAC received money from the Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie Foundations as well as from the Agency for International Development (AID)… Between 1964 and 1974, nearly $20,000,000 worth of grants were passed through these American institutions to the UAG, controlled by Los TECOS. According to a report in the Albuquerque Journal, “they believe they are using Jewish gold to combat the Jews” (end of Wiki quote). And we wonder why our campuses are filled with pro-Palestinian sympathizers and anti-Semitism is rife; why the FBI (rightly) suspects certain Traditionalists of neo-Nazi activities and of promoting anti-Semitism.
As explained in earlier blogs, all these LibTrad groups have common roots: “The Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement or ORCM is a group of priests founded by Fr. Francis E. Fenton acting on the suggestions of Fr. Joaquin Sáenz y Arriaga, S.J., and was the U.S. organization parallel to the Mexican organization Unión Catolica Trento, founded by Fr. Saenz along with Frs. Moises Carmona and Adolfo Zamora. Fr. Fenton was a founding member of the “conservative” John Birch Society, and was on its American Opinion Speakers Bureau” (https://www.liquisearch.com/orthodox_roman_catholic_movement). The John Birch Society itself has been linked to Freemasonry HERE and HERE.
It is important to note that publication of the above documents make such matters notorious according to the 1917 Code. In a Bull issued on Dec. 25, 1925, Pope Pius XI declared: “Those who have notoriously belonged to Masonic sects or other forbidden societies of the like should not be absolved unless they shall have made an abjuration before the confessor, done all the law requires, withdrawn from the sect and repaired the scandal as far as they can” (AAS 17-611). There can now be no absolution but certainly all the other conditions must be fulfilled. Only public withdrawal from the entire Traditional movement itself and the renunciation of any claim to orders whatsoever could satisfy Pope Pius XI’s conditions.
For 26 years the Los TECOS situation has been known to at least some Traditionalist pseudo-clergy and shamefully hidden from view. Not only are the followers of these men aiding and abetting them by allowing them to simulate the sacraments, but they are also cooperating with Freemasons — apostates. It is way past time to do penance and make amends for such egregious crimes and Lent is the ideal time to make these amends to Our Lord, whose sufferings are already so greatly intensified by our sins. If LibTrad followers really want to know who they are dealing with and what the game of their pseudo-clergy is really all about, please watch this short YouTube video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMg1Hk2DWHs
See if it doesn’t set off some alarms. What would happen if Traditionalist “priests” and “bishops” now deceiving so many were stripped of their collars and mitres, their churches, their power, their control, which in reality has never existed? Only YOU have the power to shatter the illusion.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 18, 2025 | New Blog

+St. Bernadette Soubirous+
Introduction
A few months ago, in the blog article HERE, I mentioned the exposure of upper-level John Birch Society (JBS) members and their associates as high-degree Freemasons. Recently, a reader brought my attention to Francis’ picture on the January cover of the JBS magazine New American asking the question: “Is the Pope a Communist?” by William F. Jasper. Jasper has been writing for in the affirmative. While this will be received by those in the Novus Ordo sect opposing Francis as a confirmation of their claims that he’s not a true pope, the very fact that the article is belatedly trumpeting this fact should sound alarm bells. Why? Because the Birch Society, established in 1960, certainly did not call out the Communist sympathizers Roncalli (John 23) and Montini (Paul 6) whose conduct in the 1950s (and later their concessions to Communist leaders and governments) made their intentions clear long ago. Even though the idea of a sede vacante had been raised, they never seriously addressed the issue at a time when it was most crucial that it be addressed. And as mentioned in the Francis article, they knew full well that the Church had been infiltrated.
This because those espousing sede vacante then were considered the lunatic fringe, and no one picks up paid members by appearing to consider such theories. Had Traditionalists themselves made the papacy their primary concern and cried foul, this might not have been the case. They had the tools at hand — papal pronouncements, Canon Law, Church history and much more — but they refused to study the matter and arrive at certitude regarding the validity of the 1958 election. The Siri fanatics clouded the matter by insisting their boy was the real pope — another failed attempt to “preserve” the papal line, as demonstrated HERE. Practicing heretical exclusivism, LibTrads championed the liturgy above papal supremacy, as if the liturgy could exist without valid clergy in communion with a certainly canonically elected pope to celebrate it. As we wrote in our last blog, they called themselves Traditionalists because they believe, as the Traditionalists condemned by the Church believed, that: “Human reason is of itself radically unable to know with certainty any truth or, at least, the fundamental truths of the metaphysical, moral, and religious order” (Catholic Encyclopedia).
Catholics ignorant of their faith and desperate for clergy were oblivious. As stated last week, their Modernist-leaning clergy had already eroded the authority of the papacy to such an extent they scarcely paid attention to the discrepancy. They viewed Traditionalists as the new heads of their Church and the JBS offered them an alternative world view that seemed to agree with the Church’s stand against Communism. This view, however, was Americanist-leaning and skewed. Russia, Russia, Russia was the real terror — no mention of the erosion of morals, the destruction of the Church and her absence as a guiding force on the world stage, or the dangers of Freemasonry and the Illuminati. Instead Catholics were offered the conspiracy of the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the Federal Reserve and world bankers, etc. Any weaving in of the Freemasons and the Modernists, or the real cause of Russia’s errors — schism — was left out of the equation. But then what can one expect with Freemasons running the show?
And this diversion and reorientation successfully distracted Catholics exiting the Novus Ordo from focusing on the purely spiritual nature of the problems in the world. Because their “priests” actively supported and promoted the JBS, they followed right along. But over time, Birch influence seemed to wane with Traditionalists. The Internet was born and more interesting conservative talking heads popped up everywhere. Trad sects abounded in every shape and form imaginable. Now Birchers sense a new opportunity, perhaps — a new exodus from the Novus Ordo they can cash in on. Novus Ordo sect members are calling out Francis as pope, unlike those leaving in the 1960s-1970s, and the JBS is siding with them. So what has changed, and why are they now deciding, after all the damage is done, that the man they are still calling “Pope” is a Communist? Readers can probably guess the answer, but let’s hit the high points.
The Birch Society’s Masonic agenda
Jasper asks, toward the end of his article, “Were American intelligence agencies used to coerce and blackmail “regime change” in the Roman Catholic Church? Is this a key part of the Deep State’s plan to create a Deep Church? It certainly looks that way, as we have reported here in the past.” Here Jasper is referring to his comments on Bp. Vigano’s letter to Pres. Trump in June of 2020: “There are faithful Shepherds who care for the flock of Christ, but there are also mercenary infidels who seek to scatter the flock and hand the sheep over to be devoured by ravenous wolves. Just as there is a deep state, there is also a deep church that betrays its duties and forswears its proper commitments before God.” Vigano, the new Lefebvre, was ordained in 1968. His consecrator, Bishop Carlo Allorio, is listed as a Council Father for all four sessions of the false Vatican 2 council. Needless to say, as a member of the Novus Ordo sect Allorio was incapacitated to validly ordain or consecrate anyone, per Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis and the 1917 Code of Canon Law, then in effect. So Vigano, an avid supporter of Benedict 16, is no cleric.
What is the purpose of the JBS in ignoring the blatant Communist affiliations of John 23 and Paul 6 and suddenly recognizing those of Francis now? Well it is quite simple, if one follows the stated intent of the Masonic game plan. The secret societies do not want to wipe out the idea of the papacy. Instead, as they state in the Alta Vendita: “What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs… To assure ourselves a Pope of the required dimensions, it is a question first of shaping for this Pope a generation worthy of the reign we are dreaming of. Leave old people and those of a mature age aside. Go to the youth and if it is possible, even to the children. You will contrive for yourselves at little cost a reputation as good Catholics and PURE PATRIOTS…”
That generation raised at least partially in the reign of Pope Pius XII, who fled the Novus Ordo sect in the 1960s and 1970s, will soon be gone. Their children and grandchildren, born following Vatican 2, the advent of the Internet and all modern perversions, will then be all that is left of those who at least identify as Catholic. Scarcely any of them have been imbued with any true Catholic sense, only that false sense conveyed to them by Traditionalists and the false church in Rome. They follow only what their misguided “clergy” tell them, those pretending to retain their titles of cardinals, bishops and priests. They are incapable of independent thought or investigation, unless it tends to the Modernist bent of their leaders. They have no idea of what really happened following the death of Pope Pius XII and seem to have never heard of the Catholic rule of law, the observance of the Sacred Canons contained in the 1917 Code. If they follow any law at all, it is only that of the desecrated 1983 code instituted by John Paul 2.
Most of them are good little patriots; some of them are Americanists. The Birchers saw to that, presenting as “pure patriots.” This is why many conservatives in the Novus Ordo sect and some LibTrads will welcome the endorsement of the John Birch Society, and because of their parents’ and grandparents’ involvement it will be familiar to them and will even pass for “tradition.” The new-churchers enjoy the freedoms granted them by the false Vatican 2 council and have no desire to relinquish them. It normalizes their relationship with their non-Catholic peers and the false charity it exudes makes socializing with them so much easier. They have been rigorously brainwashed into believing that the papacy will exist “unto the consummation,” when this was never taught by the Church. In fact the absence of the papacy and the Mass in the end times has been anticipated by the Fathers and revered Catholic theologians and commentators, who base their teaching on Divine revelation. But of course this does not concur with the Masonic ideal; Masons have no desire to destroy the idea of the papacy, only to pervert and manipulate it.
JBS identified as Masons decades ago
We have often quoted Mary Lejeune, a Catholic writer who passed away in the 1980s, on the JBS. There was some realization of the unCatholic position of the JBS even then, as Lejeune reports in her Sept.-Oct. 1976 newsletter: “The favorable response to my May-June issue re the connection between The John Birch Society and The Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement [founded by Fathers Saenz-Arriaga and Francis Fenton] was absolutely overwhelming! Many, many of the letters and long-distance telephone calls came from Catholic ex-Birchers (I had no idea that there were so many on my mailing list) who related to me the many sad experiences that they had suffered through — once they found out the truth about the JBS and decided to expose said organization. Quite a few had given up in frustration after they found that their sincere efforts to help out were thwarted by certain “cliques” within the Society. One lady asked me if I was aware of the “Zionist infiltration” within the JBS. I am completely aware of this situation (readers have sent me much documentation to this effect) — a situation which causes me great concern since the safety of Catholics, who refuse to leave the Society, is at stake!”
“I am concerned about them because the ORCM organization is run (with few exceptions) by priests and laity who are what can only be referred to as “super-Birchers.” These super-Birchers are thwarting the efforts of people, such as myself, to expose the Masonic and Zionist influence within the JBS (and other “anti-communist outfits like them) in order to protect the Catholic members of the “remnant” who sincerely believe that they cannot live without the Mass and who will go anywhere to attend it… Mr. Welch believes in evolution (some Christian!) As anyone turning to page 140 of his “Blue Book” can clearly see. On page 155 of the same book we find that the Society is both a religion (?) and a revolution. I can believe this since the Birchers tried to “pump” me (however subtly) regarding the so-called “changes in the Catholic Church” since Vatican II.
“As I said previously, I have known about the Masonic nature of the JBS for a long time, but within the last six months or so I have learned a lot more about the deception and hypocrisy which is going on within said Society… Some will claim that these are days of emergency (against a Communist takeover which has already occurred), and that we should ignore our different religious beliefs and fight the battle together. The Novus Ordo “hierarchy” keeps telling the new “People of God” the same thing. Anyone who suggests such a thing to Catholics is putting said Catholics in a position wherein they can quickly become weakened in their faith. Once the faith is weakened, there is a great danger of losing it entirely… Today, dear readers, we are in a spiritual battle, a death-struggle between the real Catholic Church and Satan himself and there isn’t a political organization in existence today which can save the world — especially this country.
“The morals in this country today are so decadent that only the great chastisement from the hand of God can purify it. And let the Birchers not tell me that they write against immorality — indeed they do! But let them clean up their own “closets” in the “upper echelons” before they start preaching to others… The JBS gives hope to the people when there is no hope. The JBS, like some other “anti-communist” preachers around today, have to give people hope, otherwise they would go out of business, and the JBS is a very commercial organization! …America is doomed — not because good people didn’t fight to save her. America is doomed because the Catholic hierarchy (made up of enemies and cowards) robbed the American people (both Catholics and Protestants) of a strong, spiritual leadership.” (End of Lejeune quotes.)
So true Catholics were warned, and some listened even then. But their children and grandchildren certainly have not been warned and are more vulnerable today by far than their parents ever were.
A new “conservatism” is the real goal
Once everything is put into perspective, the JBS’s motives become clear. They deliberately ignored the ”soft” takeover of the papal See in Rome because John 23 and Paul 6 were “normalizing” church relations with Freemasons. Later John Paul 2 walked some of the more egregious abuses of his predecessors back, just enough that it appeared he was anti-Communist, given his Polish origins and work with the underground during World War II. Then Benedict 16 continued this course, appearing even more “traditional,” and the Latin Mass groupies were encouraged. So this is where they picked up, citing their previous articles on Vigano’s “Deep Church.” It doesn’t matter that a much more comprehensive volume (John Courtenay Murray, Time/Life and the American Proposition, David Wemhoff, 2015), superior documentation-wise by far to Taylor Marshall’s Novus Ordo work, proves that the election of Roncalli was invalid, owing to lay interference (and the 1917 Code of Canon Law).
Like the LibTrad pseudo-clerics themselves, the JBS wishes to keep the idea of a papal “line” alive at all costs. Sacrificing dogma on the altars of their greed and lust for power, they are happy to violate the laws and teachings of the Church if it advances their own agenda. Nor is there any regard for Catholic teaching, for the Vatican 2 documents on ecumenism only echo the JBS’ own credo — liberty, equality and fraternity. Proof of this can be found on page 11 of The Neutralizers, written by JBS founder Robert Welch: “All we are interested in here is opposing the advance of Communism so that Jews and Christians alike, and Mohammedans and Buddhists, can again have a decent world to live in.” Lejeune nailed it when she wrote that the JBS teaches: “…we should ignore our different religious beliefs and fight the battle together.” This fits right in with the American Proposition — that Catholics have no right to claim the Catholic Church is the one true Church of Christ or evangelize to this effect.
Toward the end of his article, Jasper writes: “The papal throne does seem to be occupied by an individual who fits the description of an apostate socialist/communist. How has this come about? The answer to that burning question would require much more space than is available here. However, it is important to note that the subversion we are now witnessing in the Bergoglian papacy was made possible by more than a century of patient infiltration.” It is how the results of this infiltration are interpreted and who is interpreting them that matters, and the JBS surely knows this. It is why they have waited all this time to address this matter head on, when it is too in-your-face to ignore. They quote Pope Pius XI’s Divini Redemptoris, but they do not cite Pope Pius XII’s 1948 and 1949 condemnations of Communism, which declare those either sympathizing with it or openly advancing it, particularly public officials, as apostates. It is the pope’s judgment, not theirs, that must be the determining factor here.
Francis and all his predecessors back to John 23rd were either Communist sympathizers or active supporters of Communism and therefore are considered apostates. As non-Catholics, none could validly be elected pope, given their affiliations. And yet the JBS fails to acknowledge this, pretending that 100 years (and more) of active infiltration would not contaminate and place into question the entire clerical pool. No, they leave it in the hands of those accepting these men as valid popes, with the exception of Francis. And this because the endgame rules call for a usurper pope who appears to be valid and conservative (by today’s standards only), working with world governments to realize the Masonic dream of a one-world religion. Once the Catholic Church was stripped of every vestige of possible efficacy and sacramental validity, there was no objection to this proposition. In fact it could eventually work hand in hand with a plan that would appear to endorse conservatism and reject the New World Order, purging the existing church in Rome and returning to the “old Church,” under the auspices of a charismatic leader restoring the world to a more conservative state.
This would satisfy both the “Catholic” expectations of restoration and a period of peace, foretold in Catholic prophecy and at Fatima, as well as usher in peace in Israel and the advent of the Jewish Messiah. A new “pope” could even rule from Jerusalem. And this would satisfy the goals of both the secret societies and their JBS satellites.
The JBS and British Israel
The Protestant writer Helen M. Peters states that “[Robert Welch’s] definition of Christianity is British Israel and is not based on the Deity of Jesus Christ at all…” The British-Israel hypothesis is that “Anglo-Saxons are the lineal descendants of the ten tribes of Israel and inherit the wonderful promises made to them. These promises the Anglo-Saxons possess nationally” (Protestant theologian William Hoste). “It thus provides for the world another gospel, which captivates and hypnotizes them with the thought of capturing great earthly blessings for themselves and the British Empire, apart from repentance and faith in Christ, as though He had never died and risen to procure us blessings…” British Israel can be found on the second level of the Masonic pyramid appearing in the original edition of Lady Queenborough’s work, Occult Theocrasy. Concerning the end times, British Israel advocates believe that:
- Before the Second Coming, the Jerusalem temple will be rebuilt.
- The Jerusalem temple, not the Church, is where Antichrist will show himself as God.
- Following the Second Coming, this same temple will exist in Jerusalem, or possibly a new or reconsecrated one.
- During an earthly millennium, animal sacrifices offered at this temple will commemorate Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.
As I have explained before, it is primarily the British Israel adherents, among them Traditionalists, who expect a millennium and the restoration of Christ’s Church on earth. Traditionalists believe they will be the beneficiaries of this restoration and Fundamentalists believe it will be a Jewish operation that will somehow include Christians, but they are not in agreement on the extent or timing of this involvement. Millenarianism, even in its mildest, spiritual sense, has been condemned by the Holy Office and is entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis (ASS 36, 1944, 212). The condemnation reads: “The Holy Office issued a decree on July 11, 1941 (in the session held on July 9) which reached the same conclusion in a letter sent to Archbishop Jose M. Caro-Rodriguez in Santiago, Chile: “It is not possible to safely teach systematic millenarianism even if moderated — namely that it is Catholic revelation that Christ, at the resurrection of the just, will return to reign bodily on this earth.”
In an Internet article, B. E. Strauss, identifying as a Catholic layman, observes that: “The consummation of the ages denotes the last of all ages of the world, the age of the Church. This last age consummates the ages that came before, and it is itself consummated by the consummatio saeculi, by the consummation of the (last) age” or actual consummation by fire/end of the world. Strauss points out that the most common interpretation is consummation of the world, not consummation of the ages or centuries, as it should be. He notes that the Church has not said much on this discrepancy. But as noted in previous blogs, there are other indications from magisterial documents that the hierarchical Church is not guaranteed to last “unto the consummation” of the world by fire as previously thought. In order to avoid even mitigated Millenarianism, it is important to not associate the “end of the age or centuries” translation with the meaning that such an age will be succeeded by a 1,000-year period of peace.
Strauss continues: “…The Vatican Council solemnly teaches that the Lord promised shepherds and teachers until the consummation of the age – usque ad consummatio saeculi — which, according to Catholic commentary, BEGINS WITH THE REVELATION OF ANTICHRIST, who is announced to reign before the return of the Lord. Hence, apostolic succession seems to have come to an end already, and we deal with shepherds of vengeance.” The thousand-year reign probably began after the papacy was firmly established in Rome once the major persecutions of Christians subsided. In 445, Emperor Valentinian pronounced that the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope to be called Vicar of Christ (492-496). A little over 1,000 years later, Luther tacked his heresies to the door of Wittenberg Cathedral, followed by Henry VIII’s defection around 1532. Freemasonry was established in England 200 years after Luther’s revolt but existed secretly from the late 1400s on.
Conclusion
A new world order might mean something different than people are expecting. It could mean that a majority of countries together decide to roll back the clock so to speak, peacefully co-exist, appear to return to a more spiritual existence and more or less live by democratic principles — for a time. But we must remember that “The day of the Lord shall so come, as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come upon them, as the pains upon her that is with child, and they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. For all of you are the children of light, and children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore, let us not sleep, as others do; but let us watch, and be sober” (1Thess. 5: 1-6). Any reconstruction of the Church or pretended peace — all will be an illusion. For there is no reconstructing the Church once she has lost Her apostolicity. And there can be no peace without Christ’s true vicar. As Msgr. Van Noort wrote in his Christ’s Church, 1959:
“Just for the sake of argument — even though it cannot actually happen — let us conjure up some church which would bear a merely specific likeness to Christ’s Church; a church which would be like it in all respects except numerical identity. Imagine, now, that the Church planted by the apostles has perished utterly. Imagine whether you make it the year 600, 1500, or 3000-that all its members have deserted. Imagine, furthermore, that out of this totally crumpled society a fresh and vigorous society springs up and then, after a time, is remodeled perfectly to meet the blueprints of the ancient but now perished apostolic structure. Such a process would never yield a church that was genuinely apostolic, that is, numerically one and the same society which actually existed under the apostles’ personal rule. There would be a brand-new society, studiously copied from a model long since extinct. The new church might be a decent imitation. IT MIGHT BE A CARICATURE. ONE THING IT DEFINITELY WOULD NOT BE IS APOSTOLIC.”
Strauss, quoted above, obviously believes Antichrist has already arrived for he says the end of the Church’s age on earth, “BEGINS WITH THE REVELATION OF ANTICHRIST, who is announced to reign before the return of the Lord. Hence, apostolic succession seems to have come to an end already, and we deal with shepherds of vengeance.” That Antichrist will be an identifiable individual is taught by the Church as certain. That he will be accompanied by those who will support and continue his persecution is confirmed by St. John, who teaches there will be “many” antichrists. Only Antichrist could cause the cessation of the Continual Sacrifice, and if this did not indeed happen in 1969, how can anyone explain why nearly all true Catholics who exited the Novus Ordo sect insisted on a return to the Latin Mass?
What Birchers and others advocating for a papal election are doing is supporting the creation of a straw man. A “straw man” is a logical fallacy opposed to the Scholastic method of St. Thomas that occurs when a person rebuts an argument by misconstruing it. The concept itself is taken from the appearance of a scarecrow, which some at first mistake for a real man but is not a real man — it is only a contrived imitation of one. Similarly, in the strawman fallacy, those depicting Francis as a Communist are ignoring the real facts in the case, that John 23 was a Communist, his election was invalid, and Francis is one of a long line of antipopes under Canon Law. An example of a straw man argument is: “I prefer wine to whiskey,” and the straw man promoter falsely concludes: “Then you must hate whiskey.” Likewise the LibTrads, who, when one says the age of the Church and with it, apostolic succession, ended with the invalid election of Roncalli, reply, “Then you are denying indefectibility, because the Church, just as Christ constituted it, will last ‘until the consummation.’”
But as Strauss and others point out, this refers to the consummation of the ages, as stated in the 1869 Vatican Council, not the final conflagration, and the Church did indeed last unspotted until Pius XII’s death. It is quite telling that LibTrads fail to be able to explain how their argument could possibly hold up, given that Christ constituted the Church with St. Peter as its head, and their pseudo-clergy have operated as the true Church without that head since Pope Pius XII’s death. A new conservative “pope,” even if he cleaned house from top to bottom, would be yet another antipope/antichrist, meant to deepen the deception and create yet more confusion. Francis may be breathing his last as we write this: Beware what comes after him. No matter how amazing his successor may appear to be in rivaling Pres. Trump’s swamp clean-up, regardless of whether he is hailed as Trump’s right-hand man on a spiritual level, the con is on. The next straw man can never resurrect the one, true Church, only Her caricature — the lying wonders foretold by St. Paul.
by Kenny Bertin | Dec 11, 2024
1917 Code of Canon Law: “Traditional” clergy are invalid © Copyright 2024, T. Stanfill Benns (All emphasis within quotes added by the author) Introduction The “Catholic restoration” crowd, now working under the umbrella of an organization known as the ISOC, have...
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 22, 2024 | New Blog

+Feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary+
Sweet Heart of Mary, be my salvation!
In my early 20s, I read a book that later would send me indirectly to the doors of Traditional “Catholicism.” That book was None Dare Call it Conspiracy, by Gary Allen. It helped me make sense of a world that was suffering a moral and religious crisis at the time, a crisis that officially began with usurpation of the throne of St. Peter but had actually been in the making for over a century. When I discovered that the Church I was baptized in, the one I had left after the institution of the Novus Ordo Missae, was being “revived” by Traditionalists, I investigated them. It was then I discovered this particular sect supported a right-wing group whose philosophy was based on Allen’s book, and everything seemed to finally come into focus. I became a member of the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement headed by Fr. Francis E. Fenton and briefly, the John Birch Society.
Four years spent in the movement, after writing for four Traditionalist publications, I realized that the goal of all these interrelated but separate sects was to maintain the status quo, not move forward to advocate for doctrinal unity which could be had only by electing a true pope. I resigned membership in the Birch society in 1982 and was done with the ORCM by 1983. I began actively advocating for a papal election in 1986-87. Readers know the rest. I have since discovered and exposed the founding and infiltration of the Traditionalist movement by Freemasons, and recently a reader has kindly advanced my knowledge regarding the Birch Society’s role in that infiltration. It further strengthens what is written HERE regarding Traditionalism’s Masonic origins and should leave Catholics with no doubt regarding the true motives and intent of LibTrad pseudo-clergy.
In that article I wrote: “Early in the Traditionalist game (1975), Catholic writer William Strojie, in his Letters, commented on De Pauw’s beliefs and affiliations and found them wanting. Strojie and Mary Lejeune, who wrote Sword of Truth were apparently the first among writers at the time to link DePauw’s Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM) to the Old Catholics and Gnostics. They also identified Fr. Francis E. Fenton’s John Birch Society-affiliated Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM) as not only linked to the Old Catholics, but also to the Americanists, (the initials for the Old Roman Catholic Church are ORCC and Fenton’s group functioned in the U.S. much as that church functions both in Britain and here).”
What Lejeune and Strojie didn’t know is that the John Birch Society’s own council members directing the society were peppered with Freemasons and Communist sympathizers. This is confirmed by former JBS members in the article found HERE. Much of the information comes from Who’s Who in America and other sources. Below the implications of this find will be discussed.
Masonic Birchers, their associates and British Israel
Most interesting about the Birch expose article is that it lists as one of their council members a Dr. [John] Grady, founder of the Shickshinny Knights (Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem, SOSJ) but does not refer to his Masonic membership in this order. The Shickshinny Knights were taken to court and denounced as a legitimate order. They also were investigated by the FBI for neo-Nazi and terrorist-type connections in the 1990s (https://barthsnotes.com/2012/05/24/patcon-and-the-investigation-of-a-sovereign-order/). Wikipedia rightly reports that Fr. Fenton founded the ORCM on the suggestion of and with the support of Rev. Joaquin Saenz- Arriaga, a Mexican canonist and theologian. The translator for Arriaga’s work frankly admits, in a dedication for The New Montinian Church, that Arriaga was a member of the Order of St. John Jerusalem, an order that also tracks back to Marcel Lefebvre. Below is the preface to Saenz-Arriaga’s book.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE
“Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, S.J., Ph.D. was born October 12, 1899, ordained a Jesuit priest in April, 1930, and died in April, 1976. An acclaimed sentinel and guardian of the Rock of St. Peter, he held doctorates in philosophy, theology and Canon Law. An active and prodigious traditionalist writer, he authored or co-authored more than fifty books exposing the neo-gnosticism of the Post-Conciliar Church, including such well-known texts as Sede Vacante (The Vacant Chair), For Christ and Against Christ, The New Mass Is Not the One Catholic Mass, The Plot Against the Church, etc. A dedicated servant of Christ, his love of God and mankind propelled him to write the present comprehensive expose against the occult conspiracy. A shining star of the Jesuit Order and the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, he first published La Nueva Iglesia Montiniana on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15, 1971. This was subsequently translated and published in Italian, creating such a furor within liberalized Church circles that it even brought about an invalid excommunication, handed down by a bishop who did not have jurisdiction over Fr. Saenz and who did not call a tribunal to hear the case. It is hoped that the timely and long-awaited publication of this book on August 15, 1985 will provide the reader with enough historical insight to appreciate the nature of the pagan anti-Christian conspiracy which is at work against the Church.”
It should be no surprise, then, that Fenton himself was a member of the same organization on which Grady also sat as a council member, or that Saenz-Arriaga was a member of Grady’s Shickshinny Knights. “Fr.” Dan Jones, an ORCM pseudo-cleric, regularly promoted Grady’s side organization, the American Pistol and Rifle Association, and recruited Traditionalists for membership in the group. Jones also openly promoted British Israel ideology in his Sangre de Cristo Newsnotes. He would later embrace a schismatic alternative-pope group in Canada condemned by Pope Pius XII.
Although not a council member, another possible Masonic connection was Kennett Bawden, father of David Bawden, aka “Pope Michael.” According to family members, the elder Bawden left the Masons on embracing the Catholic faith, sometime in the 1960s, 1970s. During his time as a member of the St. Pius X Society and for some time afterward, Kennett Bawden was a public relations agent for the Kansas branch of the JBS (1970s, 1980s). His 1995 obituary lists him as “a lifetime member” of the JBS. He was the main funder and promoter of his son David’s 1990 “election.”
H.M. Peters on the JBS and British Israel
British Israel is treated in various articles on this site and is one of the lower rungs of Freemasonry listed on Lady Queenborough’s Masonic pyramid. The authors of the JBS article mention Protestant author and researcher, Helen M. Peters, in their work and her reference to the philosophy of the JBS as definitely supporting British Israel. Peters is quoted at length in the treatise HERE on the history of British Israelism, which the article on the Masonic origins of Traditionalism mentioned above links to the Birch Society and Traditionalists. She doesn’t expose the JBS, founded by Robert Welch, as infiltrated by Freemasons, but she definitely provides the spiritual link that places them in the service of the One World religion architects. Peters writes:
“This one “link” is all important because it not only ties in the conservative and Identity Movements, it links them with the Jew’s religion which the Identity people promote as the Kingdom Message. The Identity people are bastard offspring of Judaism because their belief in the earthly kingdom is Judaism.
“The John Birch Society has been a thorn in the flesh of many would-be patriots. The purpose of the John Birch Society is to soak up any effective opposition and neutralize it or turn it toward a false conservatism. Robert Welch and his Society has never attacked the Kingdom Message propaganda. In fact they promote British Israel under the cover of Fundamental Christianity. “Welch laid to rest any questions on British Israel to his members in his booklet THE NEUTRALIZERS. We say that he who does not want the whole truth does not deserve any truth. With this in mind let us take a close look at Welch’s double talk in his phony expose` of British Israel. He simply attacks it by one name and promotes it under another.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a booklet distributed by the John Birch Society. Its purpose, according to its author, is to “minimize the effect of the whole splintering (efforts to destroy the John Birch Society) operation.” According to Robert Welch none of his members are supposed to believe any bad stories about himself or his society unless they first check with headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts. This, most of them dutifully do.
“If through guile, one wishes to twist men’s minds, it is necessary to be compassionate, sincere, religious and, in this case, patriotic. These qualities of character cause an unfaltering admiration, stupefying followers and “neutralizing” opponents. The way for a villain to disguise his crime is to implicate it to others, blaming them for that which he is guilty.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a case in point. If we suppose that Mr. Welch has a valid attack upon advocates of “Anti-Semitism,” “Religious Neutralism,” “Academic Neutralism,” “Political Neutralism,” and “Tangentitis,” we have a right to examine him and his Society with regard to the same topics. (We have not checked with Belmont but we will go ahead.) As Mr. Welch so powerfully stated, on page 39 of THE NEUTRALIZERS, “Consistency is seldom a virtue of the bigot.” End quote. With this we agree and with this in mind we turn the spotlight upon Mr. Welch and his “Anti-Communist John Birch Society.”
“In the first section of THE NEUTRALIZERS on “Anti-Semitism” the term anti-Semitism is used twelve times. This of course injects the revolutionary tactic of racism because of the commonly false definition put upon the word “Semitic.” With all the knowledge that Sir Robert possesses he cannot prove that there is a Semitic Race, let alone that the Jews are Semites. His genealogical proof of a Semitic Race today is as impossible as is any British Israelite’s racial identity. Racial lineage dating back to any of the tribes of Israel was forever destroyed when the genealogical tablets were destroyed with the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D. The error of “Jewish Semitism” is as erroneous as the error of “Arab Semitism.” But of course the idea of race helps promote conflict and revolution.
“Then with the gall of a brass monkey he equates religion with race in order to confuse the two. On page 8 he suggests that “Jews” are sometimes “Jews” and sometimes not — “but those who had formerly been Jews and many who had not been Jews.” End quote. So Welch says on page 18 that the Communists do the “opposite of the appearance that they create so diligently.” Is he not here following the same pattern of using racism (semitism) to promote revolution?
“Then like all good Masons do, he equates all religions to one big happy family. On page 20 he states that Communism must go “so that Jews and Christians alike, and Mohammedans and Buddhists, can again have a decent world to live in.” End of quote. Now be not deceived that his plan graciously allows Christianity a fourth part with the heathens. His definition of Christianity is British Israel and is not based on the Deity of Jesus Christ at all… Mr. Welch and all the Right-Wing Communists say the bad guys are in the Kremlin. They are bad all right because they are controlled by the same British Israel that controls Mr. Welch. The only thing is, their left-wing Communism is going to give way to Mr. Welch’s “Christian Communism” (https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/hoax/unionjack_epilogue.htm).
Is that not precisely where we are headed in this coming election? And is this not reflected in the establishment of the Abrahamic Family House celebrating all three world religions, the Satanic result of indifferentism, pan-Christianism, Modernism, ecumenism and the religious liberty espoused at the false Vatican 2 council?
Replacement theology and conversion
Right-wing Christian fundamentalism, as explained by Peters above in the link on British Israel, rebuffs the idea of a “replacement theology,” or supersessionism. This term is defined by one Protestant writer as: “The animosity even some Christians have toward the Jewish people. They choose to believe in the Replacement Theology that ‘essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of the Replacement Theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.’” Romans 11: 28-31 is quoted to support the restoration of Israel: “As concerning the gospel, indeed, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance. For as you also in times past did not believe God, but now have obtained mercy, through their unbelief; So these also now have not believed, for your mercy, that they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded all in unbelief, that he may have mercy on all.”
Rev. Leo Haydock, however, interprets this as follows: “They are… enemies to God, for He has rejected them at presentfor their willful blindness…” Typically, this Protestant neglects to refer to the preceding verses, Rom. 11:25-27: “For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, (lest you should be wise in your own conceits), that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should come in. And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: ‘There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. And this is to them my covenant: when I shall take away their sins’.” Rev. Haydock comments: “All Israel shall be saved when all nations are converted [and] they [the Jews] submit to the faith of Christ… Christ Jesus shall then come to them by His powerful grace, ‘And this is to them my covenant… [when I shall take away their sins’”].
And then we find this verse: in 2 Corin. 3 vs 13-16: “And not as Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on the face of that which is made void. But their senses were made dull. For, until this present day, the selfsame veil, in the reading of the Old Testament, remaineth not taken away (because in Christ it is made void). But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. But when they shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” Let them once convert and THEN the promises will be fulfilled, in the establishment of the heavenly New Jerusalem, as the Good Book teaches. This conversion very likely already happened in part, as reported in the article cited previously on the lost Jewish tribes. But toward the very end, before the consummation of the world by fire and after the terrible chastisement and destruction of Rome, time will be given for the remaining Jews to convert, as well as “The Synagogue of Satan…those who say they are Jews and are not but do lie. I will make them to come and adore before thy feet” (Apoc. 3:9).
Who is this synagogue? As Msgr. Jouin reports in his booklet on Freemasonry: “The renewed sentences of anathema by Pope Pius IX strike most particularly the satanism of secret societies. In his Encyclical of November 2l, 1873, the Pope writes of them as ‘the synagogue of Satan.” So is Freemasonry, aligned at the top with certain Jewish entities, those of whom this pope speaks, the ones now promoting British Israel? Or is he referring to the fact that the Jews as a race have ceased to exist, since all their genealogies were lost with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., and by their dispersion among the nations. This is even taught by Jewish historians and converts from Judaism. What must Catholics believe about replacement theology, now so popular among Fundamentalists? Surely it cannot be called animosity, for Catholics are not anti-Semites. We wish to take nothing from the Jews that belongs to them, only enrich them with the acceptance of the Messiah that they mistakenly rejected so long ago. Then indeed all the promises made to them will be fulfilled. These are not our terms, but the terms of their God.
Rev. Denis Fahey reports that Pope Pius XI, in his Sept. 6, 1938, address to Belgian pilgrims wrote: “At the most solemn moment of the Mass we recite the prayer which contains the expression “sacrifice of Abel, sacrifice of Abraham, sacrifice of Melchisedek” in three strokes, three times, three steps, the entire religious history of mankind—a magnificent passage. Every time we read it; we are seized by an irresistible emotion. The sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham. Note that Abraham is called our patriarch, our ancestor. Antisemitism is incompatible with the thought and the sublime reality expressed in this text. It is alien to us, a movement in which we Christians can have no part. The promise was made to Abraham and to his descendants. It is realized in Christ, and through Christ in us who are members of His Mystical Body. Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham. No, it is not possible for Christians to take part in antisemitism. We acknowledge for all the right to defend themselves, to adopt measures of protection against what threatens their legitimate interests. But antisemitism is inadmissible. Spiritually, we are Semites.”
It is the British Israel adherents, among them Traditionalists, who expect a millennium and the restoration of Christ’s Church on earth. Traditionalists believe they will be the beneficiaries of this restoration and Fundamentalists believe it will be a Jewish operation that will somehow include Christians, but they are not in agreement on the extent or timing of this involvement. Millenarianism, even in its mildest, spiritual sense, has been condemned by Pope Pius XII and this is explained HERE. The thousand-year reign probably began after the papacy was firmly established in Rome once the major persecutions of Christians subsided. In 445, Emperor Valentinian pronounced that the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope to be called Vicar of Christ (492-496). A little over 1,000 years later, Luther began his revolt, followed by that of Henry VIII around 1532. Freemasonry was established in England 200 years after Luther’s revolt.
Conclusion
LibTrads no longer can defend the fraudulent and apostate foundations of their “church.” As documented in the Masonic origins article, The Catholic Traditional Movement (CTM), the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM), the St. Pius X Society (SSPX) — and any remaining LibTrad pseudo-clergy issue from these three organizations — ALL were founded by men later linked to the exact same secret society: the Knights of St. John Jerusalem. And now we have shown that the ORCM was intertwined with a Masonic-run organization from the outset. Any so-called clerics were excommunicated for cooperating in any way with these apostates, and any Traditionalists joining “Fr.” James Wathen’s Solemn Order of St. John of Jerusalem were excommunicated for joining a secret society. Wathen claimed in his Is the Order of St. John Masonic that the order was not aligned with Freemasonry, but it was secret in nature, never sanctioned by a reigning pope, and therefore did not have to be directly aligned to qualify as a forbidden secret society.
The link HERE explains that it was indeed a secret society populated by former WWII generals and other military personnel directing “underground armies.” Some have claimed these armies exist both in Europe and the U.S. Fidelity Magazine writer, Thomas Case, reported in the 1990s that the SSPX in St. Mary’s, Kansas was a neo-Nazi hotbed, and much of this seems to be directly traceable to the SOSJ (see HERE). LibTrads have been warned before, but the preponderance of evidence is now firmly stacked against them. The length, depth and breadth of the infiltration of the Church is something that is almost unbelievable, but the popes warned us long ago it was occurring and no one heeded their warnings or obeyed them. God warned the Israelites in Leviticus 26 about what would befall them if they broke His Covenant and disobeyed Him. (The whole chapter should be read) Sadly, we reap what we sow.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 9, 2023
© Copyright 2014, revised 2025; T. Stanfill Benns (All emphasis within quotes is the author’s unless indicated otherwise.)
We would be remiss if we did not add to the first article on the Jews the stated teachings of the Continual Magisterium on this matter, although it cannot and does not change what was said initially. One critic recently alleged that the quote from Pope Pius IX on the synagogue of Satan was taken out of context in the previous site article. Below it is presented in its entirety. It is obvious that the pope here gave a different meaning to this Scripture phrase than that offered by scripture commentators on Apoc. 2:9 and 3:9. For these passages refer to the Jews as they existed after Christ’s death, not as they exist today.
Unlike the modern writers and teachers of today, the popes did not speak idle words, nor bandy about Scripture passages as so many handy slogans or catchphrases. The pope indicates that this synagogue is drawn from many different sects — schismatical, heretical, Masonic and otherwise. Yet he credits these machinations primarily to the Masons, not the Jews, although certainly at least the more radical factions of the Jews must be counted among the sects mentioned and no one is questioning their contributions to Freemasonry. The Pope is clear, however, that this is a multi-faceted effort involving ALL those opposed to the Church.
As noted in the previous article, racially the Talmudists are not Jews; this Leon de Poncins, joining David Goldstein, points out in his “Judaism and the Vatican.” Nor are they Jews by religion, because the Old Law ceased to exist with the coming of Christ and destruction of the Temple. As Rev. Heidt relates in his commentary and Pope Pius XI taught, Christians are now Israel or “spiritual Semites.” Today’s Jews are, for the most part, Jews culturally and by nationality. There are those among their enemies who still believe they are Jews by race and oppose them on a racial basis or oppose them for whatever remains of their Jewishness racially and its cultural expression. This is why in Mit Brennender Sorge, Pope Pius XI condemned those championing only the white race as the true race, since Hitler condemned those “tainted” by Jewish blood.
The “bible” of most Traditionalists today who advocate an open opposition of the Jews is The Plot Against the Church, written by “Maurice Pinay,” (Anacleto Gonzalez Guerrero (Flores) and others, under the direction of Fr. Joacquin Saenz y Arriaga, S.J.). I corresponded with Gonzalez-Guerrero for several years during the 1980s. He was a physician and a long-time Traditionalist, having coursed through the Lefebvre sect and other Traditionalist organizations before becoming sede vacante. He is best known for his article printed in Veritas in the late 1970s “Packet from Mexico,” in defense of Lefebvre. Later Saenz and Gonzalez Guerrero left the SSPX, declaring the papal see to be vacant.
The sedevacantist thesis was officially adopted by Mexican Traditionalists following a private meeting between Saenz-Arriaga and Gonzalez-Guerrero in 1965. For many years prior, as reported under sedevacantism by Wikipedia and in other documents, Saenz had been the spiritual director for the radical right secret society Los TECOS, founded in Mexico in 1934. He also was a member of the Masonic neo-Nazi sect, the Shickshinny, PA Knights of St. John of Jerusalem (OSJ), as related by the translator of his book The New Montinian Church, (see preface). Saenz later founded the Union Catolica Trento as an off-shoot of Los TECOS with Frs. Moises Carmona and Adolfo Zamora, later to become pseudo-bishops under Abp. Peter Martin Ngo dinh Thuc.
He then helped Fr. Francis Fenton found and organize the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM) in the early 1970s as a sort of sister group to Union Catolica Trento. Fenton was an official spokesperson for the John Birch Society, later discovered to be riddled with Freemasons. Some have reported Birch founder Robert Welch was a 32nd degree Mason. Both in the Los TECOS and OSJ groups, claiming many Traditionalist members, anti-Semitism ran/runs strong. Of course none of these LibTrad priests and bishops presenting as clergy following the death of Pope Pius XII were ever valid in the first place (see our articles on Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS) and Trad invalidity on the homepage and current articles page). But their Masonic origins alone would prove them invalidly ordained and consecrated, if Pope Pius XII had not already invalidated and incapacitated them in VAS.
Meaning of the term “synagogue of Satan”
In Pinay’s work, the “synagogue of Satan” is referred to repeatedly but misleadingly in reference to the Jews. We say misleadingly, for while the scripture commentators (several commentaries were consulted) interpret this phrase in Apocalypse 2:9 and 3:9 as the more obstinate Jews of Apostolic times, they do not speculate on the specific identity of these false Jews as they might exist in our own time. The Jews of apostolic times were the synagogue of Satan because they rejected Christ and looked for another Messias. Freemasons are false Jews because they embrace the Kabbala, the Jews’ book of magic, yet are not, strictly speaking, of the Jewish faith or race. Some believe pre-Christian gnostics, who were not racial Jews, infiltrated the Jewish religion just as they have the Christian religion; if so, they were not Semites then and cannot be Semites now. They pretended to be Jewish just as they later pretended to be Catholic, gutting the Jewish church prior to Christ’s birth much as they gutted the Church in our day; hence our Lord’s condemnation of the Pharisees. Later in the 740s A.D., the Ashkenazi Jews, largely Russian, would surface who were only converts to the Jewish faith, not RACIAL Jews. This could explain the biblical reference in Apoc. 2:9 to “Those who say they are Jews and are not but are the Synagogue of Satan.”
The papal edicts against the Jews slowed down beginning in the 1600s. Freemasonry in the form of Rosicrucianism surfaced in that century. The popes began issuing their condemnations of Freemasonry in the 1700s; things were becoming much clearer, especially following the American and French Revolutions and the emergence of the Illuminati. By the 1800s they had become clearer still, allowing Pope Pius IX to identify the synagogue of Satan today as mainly Freemasonry, not just the Jews. We see this in the excerpts from his encyclical below.
Etsi multa, (On The Church In Italy, Germany, and Switzerland); Pope Pius IX encyclical, Nov. 21, 1873:
- “…Some years past, a most severe war was begun against the Church, its institutions, and the rights of this Apostolic See. If We were to pursue these matters, We would find much to say; since, however, because of the gravity of the situation, they cannot be touched on in passing, We will treat them more thoroughly at another time and place.
- “Some of you may perchance wonder that the war against the Catholic Church extends so widely. Indeed each of you knows well the nature, zeal, and intention of sects, whether called Masonic or some other name. When he compares them with the nature, purpose, and amplitude of the conflict waged nearly everywhere against the Church, he cannot doubt but that the present calamity must be attributed to their deceits and machinations for the most part. For from these the synagogue of Satan is formed which draws up its forces, advances its standards, and joins battle against the Church of Christ.”
If the synagogue of Satan already was comprised of just the Jews, as Pinay and others hold, how could it be in the process of formation under the flags of Masonic sects as described above by Pope Pius IX? Catholics are bound to hold the teachings of the popes as binding in conscience, not those of laymen not even writing with approval. That Pinay’s work has been widely read and disseminated by Traditionalists and others, and is now available on CD is common knowledge. Many quote this book and its sources exclusively as proof that Catholics must join them in outspoken opposition to the current “Jewish menace.” But if they really believe the Jews are solely responsible for destroying the Church, why are they on the muscle now when the deed already has been accomplished? They can’t very well lock the barn door after the horse has escaped, not with any hope of recapturing the horse, anyway. And if they really want to drive their point home, why rely almost solely on a book never approved by the Church, written by one or more persons in all probability prejudiced in their views, not only concerning Jewry, but even concerning the papacy?
Crypto-Jews in Mexico
Since Vatican 2, a good number of Mexicanos, previously professing to be Catholic, have confessed that their families, for long generations, were Catholic in name only and secretly were practicing Jews. This may have been the result of Marranos who immigrated to Mexico from Spain (Sephardim Jews). Such articles have appeared in national publications, with one Novus Ordo “priest” in New Mexico even admitting his dual allegiance to both religions. Recently this author received a detailed commentary on Jewish and Masonic infiltration of the Mexican Church, naming names and pointing fingers, even at present-day Traditionalist clergy. Having been victims of this infiltration for some time, and obviously having been aware of this situation for many decades, the authors of The Plot Against the Church could not help but be embittered over the fact, whereas most American Catholics were not even aware of it until recently.
This is especially true since Mexico’s Masonic (Pinay aka Flores would say Jewish) government was the cause of the Cristero revolt, and his (Gonzales-Flores’) father was one of the martyrs of that revolt. Victimized again when the betrayal of the Church became a done deal in the 1960s, those still willing to fight laid their cards on the table. But along with that play came an ingrained distrust of the papacy, not only present but past. Such ill will was nurtured among Traditionalists in general, but especially by Mexicanos, who feel that Pope Pius XI more or less threw the Cristeros under the bus. Traces of this resentment can easily be detected in Pinay’s work, especially in view of the fact that he quotes the provincial and ecumenical councils primarily, not the popes, as the sources of his research. This may be an indication that like so many Traditionalists, Flores entertained Gallicanist tendencies. He blames Jewish influence for the exclusion of conciliar condemnations of the Jews from the 1917 Code of Canon Law, but in this he is mistaken.
Any decrees of ecumenical councils, particularly those canons stigmatized with an anathema still bind, since the pope must approve all such decrees. Why was this not pointed out? Pinay’s main objection is that the bishops and the priests not willing to energetically combat and condemn the Jews were ordered excommunicated by the Third Lateran Council and the Code removed this excommunication. He gives the paragraphs as XXVI and XXVII, but says they condemn heresies and heretics, when strictly speaking, Jews are regarded as apostates, (see pgs. 580-582, Feb. 1967 edition of his work). Quotes below from this very council disprove both the fact that the Code removes such excommunications as well as the fact that the council ordered the faithful to actively combat the Jews. It was not the Jews that the Third Lateran Council ordered both clergy and faithful to battle at all costs but the Cathars; “faithful Christians” are encouraged to “take up arms against them.” It is true that the previous paragraph, 26 addresses abuses by the Jews, but there is no indication that the Jews are included among those mentioned in the succeeding paragraph.
Third Lateran Council — 1179 A.D.
“26. Jews and Saracens are not to be allowed to have Christian servants in their houses, either under pretense of nourishing their children or for service or any other reason. Let those be excommunicated who presume to live with them. We declare that the evidence of Christians is to be accepted against Jews in every case, since Jews employ their own witnesses against Christians, and that those who prefer Jews to Christians in this matter are to lie under anathema, since Jews ought to be subject to Christians and to be supported by them on grounds of humanity alone. If any by the inspiration of God are converted to the Christian faith, they are in no way to be excluded from their possessions, since the condition of converts ought to be better than before their conversion. If this is not done, we enjoin on the princes and rulers of these places, under penalty of excommunication, the duty to restore fully to these converts the share of their inheritance and goods.
“27. As St. Leo says, though the discipline of the church should be satisfied with the judgment of the priest and should not cause the shedding of blood, yet it is helped by the laws of Catholic princes so that people often seek a salutary remedy when they fear that a corporal punishment will overtake them. For this reason, since in Gascony and the regions of Albi and Toulouse and in other places the loathsome heresy of those whom some call the Cathars, others the Patarenes, others the Publicani, and others by different names, has grown so strong that they no longer practise their wickedness in secret, as others do, but proclaim their error publicly and draw the simple and weak to join them, we declare that they and their defenders and those who receive them are under anathema, and we forbid under pain of anathema that anyone should keep or support them in their houses or lands or should trade with them…With regard to the Brabanters, Aragonese, Navarrese, Basques, Coterelli and Triaverdini {17}…they should be subject in every way to the same sentence and penalty as the above-mentioned heretics…On these {18} and on all the faithful we enjoin, for the remission of sins, that they oppose this scourge with all their might and by arms protect the Christian people against them. …”
“We command that those who refuse to obey the exhortation of the bishops in this matter should not be allowed to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord. Meanwhile we receive under the protection of the Church, as we do those who visit the Lord’s Sepulchre, those who fired by their faith have taken upon themselves the task of driving out these heretics, and we decree that they should remain undisturbed from all disquiet both in their property and persons. If any of you presumes to molest them, he shall incur the sentence of excommunication from the bishop of the place, and let the sentence be observed by all until what has been taken away has been restored and suitable satisfaction has been made for the loss inflicted. Bishops and priests who do not resist such wrongs are to be punished by loss of their office until they gain the pardon of the Apostolic See.”
So judging by the last sentence, it seems these bishops and priests lose their office for resisting the molestation of those who drive out the heretics or for failing to drive these heretics out themselves, for the excommunication appears to be levied on those only who fail to prosecute those molesting defenders of the faith.
Penalties for heresy still in effect
From 1215 on, by order of Innocent III, the Jews were made to wear distinctive badges and dress and if not yet in ghettoes, they usually were confined to living in certain areas in the various countries. But even before this order they were more easily identified by their very culture and religious practice and were closely monitored by the local clergy and Rome. The Cathars and others, however, were not so contained and became very open in fomenting their errors. Since this council was held in 1179 and deals with anathema against heretics it was renewed as a penalty by Pope Paul IV in his 1559 bull, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, later confirmed by Pope St. Pius V in his Intermultiplices. So seeing that this council document, only quoted piecemeal by Pinay, calls upon us to actively oppose THESE above-named sects, are we then to assume that we should take up arms against the Freemasons, Novus Ordo followers and Traditionalists? For all these are heretics and apostates just as dangerous as the Cathars! How strange that those using Pinay’s work as gospel truth single out only the Jews from this Council document and ignore, analogously at least, these other dangerous heretics now persecuting the Church!
Pope Paul IV renewed the penalties for excommunication against all schismatics, heretics and apostates, also making cooperation with them in any way matter for ipso facto excommunication. But he did not renew the call to oppose these wretched people by taking up arms, at least in the situation he addressed in his bull. In fact he advised the faithful fleeing from heresy to resort instead to the secular arm to have those hierarchy removed who were never truly hierarchy, but had long ago deposed themselves. Anyone with even a smidgen of common sense knows that what was possible in medieval times and the day of the Catholic state is scarcely possible today. In his work, The Vatican Decrees in Their Bearing on Civil Allegiance (1875), Henry Cardinal Manning goes into great detail to demonstrate that the Vatican Council definition has no power whatsoever to command or depose non-Catholic governments. The Church cannot order those outside Her spiritual pale to obey Her rules and laws. And Catholic subjects cannot use the excuse that they must obey only the pope to escape obedience to civil law, which the Church always has held as binding.
“Until a Christian world existed, there was no apta materia for the supreme judicial power of the Church in temporal things,” Manning wrote in his above-mentioned work. “St. Paul laid down as a rule of law that he had nothing to do in judging those that were without the unity of the Church. It is only when nations and kingdoms become socially subject to the supreme doctrinal and judicial authority of the Church that the conditions of its exercise are verified.” And none could be duly subject to a non-existent judicial authority today. So without Catholic secular officials to appeal to in such a crusade against heresy and apostasy — without a true pope and hierarchy to command us and support us — how are we expected to embark on such a foolhardy mission, that of openly engaging the Jews? Civil law in this country forbids persecution of other religions as well as persecution of those of another race and so did Pope Pius XII and his immediate predecessors. If the popes do not command us to take up arms against the Jews or heretics existing today, and clearly they do not, then what in heaven’s name are those who are preaching such a war, at least one comprised of words and civil actions, thinking?
These people are taking entirely out of context a teaching of an ecumenical council, applied to certain heretical sects, but not the Jews, by applying it in the manner they see fit. Why? The only possible conclusion one can reach is that they really do believe that they must eradicate the Jews both as a race and as a religious entity. But what about Freemasonry, which Pope Pius IX says today is the real problem? And what about the Muslims? For from a racial standpoint, many agree, they have more Jewish blood than the Jews themselves. Even though Pinay claims that Canon Law relieves Catholics of obedience to previous laws in this matter, this is not the case as shown above. For those previous laws dealing with faith and morals are just as binding today as they ever were, as we just went to great lengths to explain in the articles posted on Cum ex. Many of the laws the popes set down concerning the Jews still bind us, for disciplinary documents are binding in many cases just as those on faith and morals are binding. But they did not set down any laws commanding us to openly oppose the Jews, or to persecute them. In fact they forbade us to do this. Below is a summary of exactly what the Continual Magisterium has taught over the centuries concerning the Jews.
The Popes on the Jews
Pope Innocent III: “The Jews… against whom the voice of the blood of Christ cries out … are not to be killed [but] they must always be dispersed as wanderers upon the face of the earth… They are admitted to our familiarity only through our mercy; but they are to us dangerous as the insect in the apple, as the serpent in the breast.”
At the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, Jews were forbidden to injure Christians by exercising usury, they were ordered to wear a distinctive badge and dress, Christians were not allowed to work for them as nurses, tutors or servants and Christians were warned not to cohabit with Jews or Jewesses. It also was ordered that while Christians could testify against Jews, Jews could not testify against Christians.
Pope Innocent IV ordered the French King to burn copies of the Talmud owing to the blasphemies contained therein concerning our Lord and His Blessed Mother.
Pope Eugenius IV basically ordered the Jews to be avoided as vitandus. Christians are not to use Jewish lawyers or legal experts in matrimonial cases or use Jewish doctors as obstetricians. Christians cannot bequeath goods to Jews in their wills.
Pope Paul IV forbade them to live in common with the Christians.
Pope Clement VIII: “All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty, especially the farmers, working class people and the very poor… Their ethical and moral doctrines as well as their deeds rightly deserve to be exposed to criticism in whatever country they happen to live.”
Pope Benedict XIV: “Furthermore, by means of their particular practice of commerce, they amass a great store of money and then by an exorbitant rate of interest utterly destroy the wealth and inheritance of Christians,” (A Quo Primum).
Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII: Beginning in the 1880s and extending into the 20th century, there are reports that both the papally sanctioned publications L’ Osservatore Romano and Civilta Catolica, also La Croix took the hard line against the Jews.
Pope St. Pius X: “We cannot prevent Jews from going to Jerusalem, but we can never sanction it. Jews have not recognized Our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people. They had ample time to acknowledge Christ’s divinity without pressure, but they didn’t. Should the Jews manage to set foot on the once promised old-new land, the missionaries of the Church would stand prepared to baptize them. Jerusalem cannot be placed in Jewish hands,” (Wikipedia).
Pope Pius XI (Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, March 25, 1928): “The Catholic Church habitually prays for the Jewish people, who were bearers of the Divine revelation up to the time of Christ; this, despite, indeed, on account of their spiritual blindness. Actuated by this love, the Apostolic See has protected this people against unjust oppression and, just as every kind of envy and jealousy among the nations must be disproved of, so in an especial manner must be that hatred which is generally termed anti-Semitism,” (Acta Apostolica Sedis).
Rev. Denis Fahey tells Catholics how they must comport themselves where the Jews are concerned and walk that fine line between anti-Semitism and the championing of the rights of Christ the King. In his The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation, Fahey writes that while addressing Belgian peasants over the radio, Pope Pius XI read a prayer from the Canon of the Mass one day, remarking: “Anti-Semitism is incompatible with the sublime ideas and truths expressed in this text,” (prayer following the Consecration, beginning “And this deign…”) “We Christians can take no part in such a movement… no, it is impossible for Christians to take part in anti-Semitism. We acknowledge that everyone has the right to defend himself, in other words, to take the necessary precautions for his protection against everything that threatens his legitimate interests. But anti- Semitism is inadmissible. Spiritually we are Semites.” According to a cardinal who witnessed the address, the Pope wept as he read the words from the Canon. This was in September 1938, after the Fascist government of Italy issued the anti-Semitic laws stripping Jews of their rights and civil liberties, including rights to inheritance, land ownership, marriage with Aryans and service in teaching posts.
Fahey comments on the passage above: “The Church condemns race hatred in general and the hatred of the Redeemer’s race in particular…Thus we find in this pronouncement of Pope Pius XI the two currents, which, down through the centuries, run through the official declarations of the Holy See concerning the Jews. On the one hand, the Sovereign Pontiffs strive to protect the Jews from physical violence and to secure respect for their family life and worship, as the life and worship of human persons. On the other hand, they aim unceasingly at protecting Christians from the contamination of Jewish Naturalism and try to prevent Jews from gaining control over Christians.” He then mentions the duty of Christians, as explained above, to observe those things concerning the Jews which the popes have forbidden. Generally, yes; Catholics are bound to oppose Naturalism.
Fr. Denis Fahey wrote at a time when a war against this great evil could possibly have been launched. But it wasn’t launched, and Catholics did not realize the true extent of the dangers. Instead many of them willingly embraced Jewish Naturalism in accepting the Novus Ordo church. As might be expected, this action culminated in a reaction — many Traditionalists overcompensated and developed an actual racial hatred for the Jews; some of them even sympathized with neo-Nazi groups and individuals, and still do today. They blamed the Jews for destroying the Church, but that blame rested far more with negligent Catholics than it ever did with the Jews or even the Freemasons.
These are the most notable of the decrees and decisions issued by the popes throughout history, or the private comments they made. In all, some 26 popes issued decrees naming the Jews, but some of these decrees were identical, others confirmed the bulls of previous popes, and still others dealt mainly with neophytes and catechumens. So of all the popes, only about 10 percent spoke out against them formally, assuming that all the main documents have been discovered that mention them. The ecumenical councils echo their teachings. It is clear that the popes treated the Jews sternly and were reluctant to give them much leeway because of the dangers they posed to the faith. But they also protected them and would not allow them to be persecuted. Pope Pius XI tells us in his last (unpublished) encyclical that the “unyielding energy” and alternating “mildness” of the popes should not be interpreted as any lack of disagreement on the subject of the Jews on the part of the Roman Pontiffs, for it mirrors only changes and variations in circumstances and the behavior of the Jews towards the Church at different times.
As noted in the first article on this subject posted Holy Thursday, Popes Pius XI and XII softened their attitude towards the Jews only to prevent/ameliorate their persecution. Pope Pius XII especially gave pristine example concerning treatment even of our greatest enemies when they are being hunted down and murdered by others. There is no use pretending that this persecution did not rise solely from their race and Hitler’s Aryan ideas concerning racial purity, which he borrowed from Theosophy and the mystery religions; it is well-known that he was involved in secret societies. And that such racial prejudice continued even long after World War II and Hitler’s defeat and lives on in a very real way today cannot be denied. That it would ever rear its ugly head among Catholics is unthinkable, but it has; and not just for religious reasons. Otherwise, there would be no attempt by Catholics to justify the excesses of warring openly against the Jews by citing a council decree that does not exist, while ignoring their responsibility to speak out against heretics once Catholic. We are to aid our enemies when they are persecuted or in danger of being persecuted, and for those who have hinted that I am “soft” on the Jews I say only that I follow the instructions of Christ to “do good to those who hate you” and the example set by the popes.
In his A Quo Primum, Pope Benedict XIV also quotes a doctor of the Church, St. Bernard, as defending the Jews against persecutors much as the last two popes did, so here I feel I am in good company. The persecutor at that time was one Radulphus, a French monk, whom Pope Benedict says was “carried away by excessive zeal…inciting the Christians to wipe them out completely. In consequence of his intemperate zeal, a great number of Jews were slaughtered.” One Peter, the abbot of Cluny also wrote against Radulphus to Louis King of France “exhorting the king to not allow the Jews to be slaughtered,” while at the same time asking the king to take severe measures against them for their abuse of Christians through usury.
St. Bernard says of the Jews: “[They] must not be persecuted; they must not be slaughtered or hunted like wild animals…Does not the Church triumph every day over the Jews in nobler fashion by bringing home to them their errors or converting them, than by slaughtering them?…” He then urges Christians to instead pray for them, that, “the veil be lifted from their hearts,” (363rd letter; letter to Henry, Archbishop of Mayence). In the present climate, those urging action against the Jews beyond those age-old sanctions already assigned by the popes run the very real risk of stirring some borderline or unstable individuals into a frenzy that would precipitate just such a massacre as Pope Benedict attributes to Radulphus.
As we have witnessed to our great sorrow, especially recently, there is no shortage of such individuals in the world today, a world gone mad as the prophet Isaias predicted for the latter days. Traditionalists Timothy McVey and John Paul 2’s would-be assassin are cases in point. Yes, the Jews killed Christ; and yes, His blood is upon their children. But do those passing as Catholics today really think that they can successfully oppose the Jews in these times, when the Jews are convinced the Church has conceded and admitted to discriminating against them? Do these people really believe they can possibly make any headway when even the popes could not successfully resolve the problem? If they do, this is sheer egoism.
Obeying the popes today
In the 15th century, the New World was established and with it came the end of the ghettoes, for American Jews at least. Jews have freely intermingled with Christians on this continent for centuries. The popes have never forbidden it in this country and for these circumstances and all true Catholics know they are not free to marry Jews or to keep close company with them. Those who love Christ and are loyal to Him and to His vicars will do the best they can to avoid financial dealings with them, not engage them as doctors, and not use them as attorneys in any matter that might even indirectly involve the faith. Nor will a Catholic knowingly work for a Jew or employ one as a nurse or nanny. They are simply obliged in conscience to choose differently in certain matters, much as Jews and Muslims would choose to avoid buying products from Christian pig farmers. But that being said, Catholics are not bound to shun them and should display the usual signs of courtesy they offer everyone else.
For the Code of Canon Law did change the status of vitandus, so that since 1917 only those may be considered vitandus who are named personally by the pope as such. Always the intent of the Catholic Church was not to ever discriminate against the Jews as a race or even a religion but to prevent contamination of Her children by those who feigned Catholicism, even working their way into the ranks of the clergy and religious. Throughout the ages, the Jews showed themselves erstwhile enemies of the Faith by blaspheming the names of Jesus and Mary and doing what they could in other ways to subvert the clergy and faithful. If the Church took measures against them, these were defensive measures to safeguard the faith of believers, and it was never without provocation and just cause on the part of the Jews. In their own publications and in secular history volumes, Jews have not hesitated to boast that they have lured Catholics from their faith and infiltrated the clergy. But this is still no excuse for disobeying the Church and demanding an eye for an eye.
Conclusion
During the speech given by Pope St. Pius X at the Beatification of Joan of Arc, the Pope told the faithful: “In our time more than ever before, the chief strength of the wicked lies in the cowardice and weakness of good men… All the strength of Satan’s reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics,” (ibid, Fahey). What are we weak in? It is clear from the consequences following Vatican 2 that Catholics did not know their faith. Pope Benedict XIV and the Cure of Ars both told Catholics in their day that this was the cause of many people losing their souls. Since the death of Pius XII, there have been no instructors in the faith. Catholics have been the victims of constant lies, half-truths, misinformation and out-and-out fraud. Some have become so confused about their faith they have abandoned it as impracticable. Traditionalist “clerics” and other self-appointed leaders ceaselessly vie with each other to gift them with their brand of the truth; or engage them in a crusade against their personal pet peeve. Yet they need listen to only one teacher, and that is Christ Himself, who speaks through His vicars. Access to their documents has never been so easy, with the advent of the Internet, and yet these documents are seldom read. Christ speaks to us, He remains with us, and yet no one reads, that they might understand.
Those pushing Catholics to realize the dangers posed by certain Jewish interests controlling politics, money and business in this nation are not wrong in what they are saying, but they assume they are talking to people who can understand what they are conveying from a truly Catholic perspective. This, however, is NOT the case. And as pointed out above, even if educated Catholics were the rule and not the exception, how could they possibly be successful in trying to change a system so totally decimated by naturalism as the American system is today without the active help and protection of the Church and Her hierarchy? Catholics must first be confident that they understand the present situation in the Church from a biblical and papal perspective, then they can leave the Traditional movement and begin learning their faith.
Because the faith was never taught and learned properly in the first place, they must start at the beginning, to learn what was missed or misunderstood and why. This takes time, patience, dedication and discipline. The material must be learned in the order provided by the catechisms the person has chosen to study and then amplified prudently with other material. Once the individual arrives at what they feel is a level of certitude about all they have studied, then perhaps more can be added to their knowledge base, but not too much at one time or too quickly. Basically the drive to combat the ascendancy of Naturalism would come under the heading of advanced studies. It is a project best confined to special Catholic Action and those suited to it, but only if they present it in the above perspective provided by the popes and do not falsely teach that any course of action should involve anything suggesting discrimination against or persecution of the Jews.
This sort of Catholic Action, however, is not something that the popes would wish us to become involved in today; given the general task of bringing most lay people up to speed, it is too risky and time-intensive, although the basic principles must be understood by Catholics. In stating that the laity must take over the duties of the hierarchy when they are absent, Pope Pius XII indicated the laity could engage in the lay apostolate, but also commented that they had to observe the Church’s known wishes in these matters. It was clearly the intent of the last two popes that specialized Catholic Action, in particular, should be overseen by the hierarchy, and we know that is not possible today.
Apostate cardinals, archbishops and bishops are the ones to blame for the demise of the Church, not primarily the Jews. They who professed to love Christ, to defend the Church with their blood (symbolized by the red color of the cardinals’ robes); those who were charged with feeding and guarding His lambs are far more at fault, as Pope Paul IV states in Cum ex…, than the enemies from without. Christ entrusted His Church to the bishops, first among them St. Peter, and even they fled from the Jews following His Passion and death on the Cross. But at least, with the exception of Judas, they did not abandon their faith. We know from lists gathered following Pope Pius XII’s death that many Cardinals and bishops were Freemasons, and they proved their affiliation by remaining in the Novus Ordo church. They also made concessions to the Jews. But persecuting the Jews will not restore the Church; instead, since the popes have forbidden it, it will only cause us to lose our souls. This Pope Pius XI also pointed out, noting that continued persecution only exacerbates the situation, intensifying the hatred and resentment of the group persecuted against their oppressors.
Repenting for our sins, engaging in the lay apostolate — in however small a way that may be — and working diligently for each other’s salvation alone will save us. As long as true Catholics continue to follow false lay and clerical leaders who feed them stones for bread, lies for truth, there is no hope of saving our souls. When these finally realize that they are bound to accept and follow only the true teachings of the Popes and Councils, and willingly give up their pet theories to embrace this obedience, then perhaps God will see fit to have mercy on mankind and shorten these dreadful times. Pope Pius XI ended his last encyclical by informing Catholics that it is “high time” they made reparation to the Sacred Heart for the sins committed against other peoples, nations and races, to avoid a terrible and just punishment from our Lord. Those who insist on assigning to the Church an attitude concerning the Jews contrary to what this pope and others have taught would do well to take this statement to heart.