Freemasons Celebrate Vatican II…

Freemasons Celebrate Vatican II…

The largest and most influential Masonic organization in Italy is the Grand Orient of Italy [Grande Oriente d’Italia]. Yes, it is the veryImage same Grand Lodge whose Grand Masters always worked for the humiliation of the Apostolic See, from the battles against Pius IX to symbolic acts of effrontery (such as Giordano Bruno’s statue in Campo de’ Fiori, a response to Leo XIII); it was also the Grand Lodge that once had jurisdiction over the well-known Propaganda Due lodge, the P2, including during the crucial years of the Vatican II Council and immediate aftermath.

This Grande Oriente d’Italia hosted a conference on June 12, 2014, at Palazzo delle Esposizioni, Via Milano, Rome, to promote the book “Il Concilio Segreto” (The Secret Council), by Ignazio Ingrao. On the panel of guests invited to present the book were Marco Politi, journalist and Vaticanist for “La Repubblica” and “Il Fatto Quotidiano”; Alberto Melloni, the very influential historian and a leader of the famous “Bologna School” founded by Giuseppe Alberigo, whose purpose was to establish forevermore the “Spirit of the Council” as the official interpretation of the conciliar documents; Marinella Perroni, theologian, professor at the Pontifical Atheneum of St. Anselm, Rome (the Anselmianum, the Pontifical Benedictine university in Rome), specializing in New Testament Studies; and, last but certainly not least, Stefano Bisi, the newly elected Grand Master of the Grand Lodge. The author, Ignazio Ingrao, a highly relevant Vaticanist, was also present. 

The meeting was recorded and can be found here in Radio Radicale in its entirety. To give a general idea of the festive and relaxed ambience, Grand Master Bisi in his remarks is proud to say that a priest he consulted told him he certainly “could receive communion.” (Obviously, no contradiction from anyone in the room.)

Below is a translation of the flyer the Grand Orient of Italy produced to promote the event:

The Church of Dialogue, from the Second Vatican Council to Pope Francis

There is a Council that has never been told, the one that took place far from the limelight, in the secret conferences among bishops and cardinals, in diplomats’ meetings, in reunions among the editorial staff of newspapers, in sections of [political] parties and even among “007’s”[…] There are hosts of Russian, Polish, English, American and of course – Italian spies, who camouflage themselves amidst prelates and listeners, compiling dossiers and even able to influence the conclave that elects Paul VI. Letters from priests who ask Montini to abolish sacerdotal celibacy materialize . There is a theologian who denounces, with courage, the scandal of pedophilia in the Church, but his cry of alarm, remains, alas, unheard.” [*] [**]

To understand an event as innovative and paradigmatic as the Second Vatican Council was, and to do so through a non–official reading, based, however, on testimonies and many unpublished, documents, means having the opportunity of getting to the heart of what is happening in the Church today. The revolutionary act of Benedict XVI, the abdicating Pope, in renouncing the throne, makes [the Pope] a bishop among bishops and fulfills that collegial spirit that had strongly permeated Vatican II; the “surprise” election of Pope Francis, the first bishop in the history of the Church to come from South America to guide the people of Christ – preacher of spiritual renewal, in humility and poverty, a strategic figure in a Church that seems to have lost its center in Old Europe, but is rediscovering itself, alive and fecund, in “the south of the world”, are all developments whose origins are generally recognizable in the unprecedented event, which marked the life of the universal Church between the pontificates of John XXIII and Paul VI.

Unfortunately, the ‘putting into effect’ of the Second Vatican Council during the course of the last fifty years of Church history has met obstacles and difficulties. The Church outlined by the conciliar meetings, i.e. outgoing and open to the world, willing to dialogue and sensitive to those positives seeds of modernity, has not always had an easy life. Fears, resistance and shortsightedness at times, have slowed down this necessary evolution. Many of the reforms on the agenda of Bergoglio’s pontificate refer back to the themes already discussed during the Council: from the family to the role of women, from priestly celibacy to the “poverty” of the Church, to cite just a few.

In short, studying the Council of yesterday will help us to anticipate the Church of tomorrow. Pope Francis has gathered together the testimony of his predecessors and is strongly and decisively committed to the up-to-date implementation of the Council. The Church in a dialogue which is focused on the peripheries, as the Argentine Pope wants, re-proposes the model that the Council Fathers desired. Therefore, a new season of confronting themes which were left hanging has opened up.

An important point of dialogue, even with the secularized and non-believers, is the one of human rights. The commitment to justice, based on the acknowledgement of the fundamental principles of natural law, characterizes the action of the Church on all latitudes and involves, not rarely, a high price to pay, even in terms of attacks and persecutions. The defense of human rights and the acknowledgement of the principles of natural law which guide the common good, may be, therefore, a useful platform to confront and discuss, for all those who have the promotion of the human person at heart.

[The last paragraph is a short presentation of Ignazio Ingrao.]

Apparently, that is the Grand Lodge’s position: the Second Vatican Council was an “innovative and paradigmatic” highly positive event, which was not “put into effect” very well — but the “revolutionary abdication” of Benedict XVI that made the pope “a bishop among bishops” set the stage for its “strong and decisive implementation” by Pope Francis. Grand Master Gustavo Riffi, leader of the Grand Lodge at the time, had set the tone in his congratulating message for the election of Pope Francis: “With Pope Francis, nothing will be as before. The choice of fraternity for a Church of dialogue is clear, uncontaminated by the logic and temptations of temporal power.” (March 14, 2013) This was the same Grand Master who had criticized the Italian Episcopal Conference in the 2006 Italian election campaign, in the previous pontificate, for daring to speak up against… abortion, euthanasia, marriage during the campaign. Those days are gone for good, presumably.

_________________________

* This first paragraph is an excerpt from the book  — the remainder of the flyer is the presentation, by the Grand Lodge, of the Council and the present pontificate. 

** In fact, much of this secret underground Council, that prepared the Council as it happened in the Vatican Basilica, has already been dissected in many books, not least “The Second Vatican Council”, by Roberto de Mattei. 

 [Post and translation: Contributor Francesca Romana. Tip: Spanish blog Ex Orbe, whose post title is very amusing: “Our Brothers (!?) from the (other) Orient.”]  Source 

Comment

As the Rorate Caeli headline reads who needs conspiracy theories when the Freemasons openly celebrate Vatican II in the Eternal City?  Hands up those who still think Vatican II was the inspiration of the Holy Spirit… 

Comments (45)

  • Pat McKay

    Some time ago I ‘nobbled’ the Bishop of Northampton when he paid a visit to my local parish. I asked him what did he think there was to ‘celebrate’ about Vatican II.

    There are many, I said, who would argue that Vatican II was a disaster for the Church. I pointed out how the Church was flourishing back in the early 60s, when we had the Traditional Latin Mass, many vocations to the priesthood and religious life, Catholic Baptisms, Marriages etc. Then along came Vatican II, when the Traditional Mass, hymns etc. got substituted virtually overnight, every Catholic became ‘his (or her) own pope’ and now we have over 90% of Catholic school-leavers also leaving the Faith.

    ‘Well, it was God’s will’, he said…..What, God’s will that countless souls should be lost?, I asked….He was obviously becoming more and more uncomfortable as I went on and eventually excused himself, saying he wanted to ‘mingle with some of the other parishioners’…..

    June 28, 2014 at 11:27 am
    • Miles Immaculatae

      It is very annoying and patronising, isn’t it, when they say that?

      There was one particular priest, who is now a bishop, who didn’t seem to have a particularly high view of my intelligence, who would always respond to my criticisms and anxieties about the post-conciliar Church with this same spurious appeal the Holy Ghost.

      “Don’t worry, the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church” he would say…

      It is such and pathetic answer. Is this the best they can do after six plus years of academic formation at pontifical universities?

      June 28, 2014 at 7:54 pm
    • Frankier

      Ever since I was a boy, which wasn`t yesterday, or the day before even, we have been asked to pray for vocations to the priesthood and the religious life but the situation has got worse. So is it God`s will that the number of priests will soon be down to double figures in this country just as it is His will that over 90% of Catholic school-leavers should leave the faith?

      Maybe it is God`s will that the bishops get off their backsides and start getting people back into the pews and the `shortage of priests situation` would sort itself out automatically.

      Why should God do the job for a bunch of people whom he has already selected to do the work for Him? After all, they are the ones who keep claiming they were called by God to their chosen vocation. Or should that be vacation?

      June 29, 2014 at 4:04 pm
  • Leo

    Editor

    You posted:

    “I’ve lost count of the conversations I’ve had, this week alone, with people – including priests – who think that the popes of the past were fine for their times, but the recent popes are right for our times.”

    The “historical contingencies” defence is the great, imaginary “Get Out of Jail Free” card that is thrown on the table by the defenders of the Conciliar novelties, omissions, contradictions and ambiguities and errors. The then Cardinal Ratzinger was amongst those who used it.

    With respect and charity, without malice, without judging minds or motives, it has to be said that, objectively speaking, the “changing times” defence is quite simply not a Catholic attitude. The words of Councils as well as a long line of Popes, Doctors of the Church, Saints, and eminent theologians leave no room whatsoever for debate on the obligation to adhere to constant, traditional teaching whether on the Mass, or on doctrine in general. Bloggers here have posted those words time, and time, and time again.

    Pope Saint Pius X, clearly identified the agenda and tactics of the Modernist propagators of the “synthesis of all heresies”:

    “Evolution in the Church itself is fed by the need of adapting itself to historical conditions and of harmonising itself with existing forms of society.”- Pascendi

    The Council and the Conciliar Popes have eschewed the Extraordinary Magisterium (or should I say the Holy Ghost was active in a negative, preventative way) and yet we are told that all the pastoral novelties are to be “accepted” under pain of the detraction if not calumny of “schism” and “private judgement”. And still we wait in vain for the beginning of an explanation of what exactly is infallible and requiring of belief and what is not, in the Conciliar documents. We really are through the looking glass at this stage. It’s like 1962 is supposed to be regarded as some sort of year zero in the Church.

    Consider how much, or more correctly, how few references there are to the pre-Conciliar magisterium in the Conciliar documents. Besides, all this “reading the sign of the times” defence can be seen to be an embarrassingly wafer thin excuse, even if we allow for sincerity.

    The last fifty years have seen the descent of Christian lands into an unspeakable, previously unimaginable abyss of depravity and perversion. Pope John rebuked the “prophets of doom” at the start of the Council, while Pope Paul spoke with satisfaction of the Church having “the Cult of Man” at its closing. I believe that one will search in vain to find mention of the word, the dogma of, “Hell” in the 102,000 words of the documents promulgated in between.

    And of course the 800 lb gorilla in room was consciously ignored. For well-known reasons there was no mention, let alone condemnation of Communism. The greatest evil in history was burning in all corners of the world and the Council which gazed strenuously at the modern world couldn’t raise a whimper of protest. Pope Pius XI’s 1937 encyclical Divini Redemptoris, which condemned Communism only made it as far as a footnote. With all due respect, the Council’s judgement on reading the “Signs of the Times” could hardly have been more off beam.

    It’s not hard to speculate on the contribution that the issuance of Pope John XXIII’s encyclical Pacem in Terris in April 1963, made to the landslide election victory of Italian Communists one month later. One month after the election, Cardinal Suenens was asked if the Pope condemned Communism. Replying from the encyclical, the Cardinal state that Communism was erroneous, but “people are always deserving of respect and have a value far above whatever views they may hold” (Paul VI, by Peter Hebblethwaite, p. 309). The commies obviously weren’t Catholic “prophets of doom”.

    As for “development” of doctrine, since the time of the death of the last Apostle, it has always involved clarification, more precision, and deeper understanding, not, most certainly not, contradiction, ambiguity and diminution. Newman’s name is usually brought to the fore, more often than not for the purposes of hijacking and disinformation. I’ve posted the following on another thread recently, so I hope readers will bear with a bit of repetition.

    Monsignor Philip Flanagan D.D. in an introduction written in a compilation of twenty five of Newman’s sermons entitled Newman Against the Liberals explains:

    “Newman’s theory of doctrinal development is fundamentally different from the theology of the Modernists, who so unjustly claim his support. For them revelation is a continuing process destined to go on till the end of time, with earlier statements of the truth being modified and perhaps even contradicted by later statements more suited to the spirit of the age in which they are made. For Newman the revealed message was given once and for all by God, to be more and more fully grasped as time goes on, but to be passed on in its entirety, undiminished and uncorrupted. For the Modernist, dogmas have no absolute truth and are valid for the time in which they are made, but not necessarily at other periods.”- p. 26 (cited in Partisans of Error, by Michael Davies, p. 54)

    Newman listed seven requirements for a true development.

    “These are unity of type, continuity of principle, power of assimilation, logical sequence, anticipation of its future, conservation of its past, and finally, chronic vigour. ‘The point to be ascertained is the unity and identity of the idea with itself through all stages of its development from first to last, and these are seven tokens that it may rightly be accounted one and the same all along’ (Newman Against the Liberals).” – Davies, p. 55

    In other words Newman expressed the same attitude to Church teaching as other Catholics who are faithful to Tradition and who continue to be subjected to ill-informed and illogical accusations.

    The following words of Newman might have written with the present Conciliar madness in mind.

    “The body of bishops failed in their confession of the Faith…They spoke variously, one against another; there was nothing, after (the Council of) Nicea (325 AD) of firm, unvarying, consistent testimony, for nearly sixty years. There were untrustworthy Councils. Unfaithful bishops; there was weakness, fear of consequences, misguidance, delusion, hallucination, endless, hopeless, extending into nearly every corner of the Catholic Church. The comparatively few who remained faithful were discredited and driven into exile; the rest were either deceivers or deceived.”
    – John Henry Newman, On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine.

    On the question of, “changing times means changing teaching” I have to quote Archbishop Lefebvre in They Have Uncrowned Him, another must read, which Stephen as mentioned lately.

    “We are dealing with people who have no idea of the truth, no concept of what can be an immutable truth. It is laughable to report that these same liberal relativists, who were the real authors of Vatican II, are coming now to dogmatize that Council that they however declared to be pastoral, and to want to impose the conciliar novelties onto us as definitive and untouchable doctrines! And they get angry if I dare say to them: ‘Oh, you say Quas Primas, the Pope would no longer write that today! Well, I say to you: it is your council that would no longer be written today; it is already overtaken. You cling to it because it is your work; but I hold to Tradition, because it is the work of the Holy Ghost!’”

    There’s nothing to be added.

    June 28, 2014 at 4:57 pm
    • editor

      Leo,

      Brilliant! I’ve already emailed one of your insightful (to put it mildly) comments to one of the priests to whom I allude in my earlier comment, and I’ll be sending him this latest from you, as well. Thank you for putting together the above crystal clear refutation of the Modernists’ flawed understanding of “living Tradition”.

      You must be due a pay rise again. I’ll have to consult Miss McMoneypenny 😀

      June 28, 2014 at 9:52 pm
  • Leo

    I was going to ask you about that, Editor. And I won’t say “cheap at half the price”. I’ll accept sterling too.

    On October 13, 1884 (interesting date that), Pope Leo XIII collapsed following morning Mass. After recovering he recounted a conversation which he understood to be between Our Lord and satan. Immediately afterwards he composed the prayer Saint Michael the Archangel which we say at the end of Mass. He also composed a longer version, which is a very powerfully worded prayer. It includes the following:

    “These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep will be scattered.”

    That prayer brings to mind the book of Daniel, those of the Machabees concerning the abomination of desolation, as well as the words of much Catholic prophecy, notably Ann Catherine Emmerich. I hope nobody is going to suggest that the Pope was an unbalanced, conspiracy kook.

    There is no need, I’m certain, to remind readers of this blog of the apostasy foretold by Our Lady at Quito, Fatima and La Salette.

    June 28, 2014 at 10:01 pm
  • editor

    Leo,

    That’s a relief about the sterling. 😀

    Some time ago that story about Pope Leo and the conversation between Our Lord and Satan was challenged on this blog. We tried to find a reliable, original source but although the story is told in a variety of versions across the internet, and is quoted all over the place, there is no first hand source given to substantiate it anywhere. If you can provide one (and if anyone can, you can!) then that would be good but until that time, I’m inclined to be a tad sceptical about the alleged conversation.

    That doesn’t diminish, in the slightest, the importance and efficacy of the prayer to St Michael at the end of low Mass – indeed, the fact that it was about the first thing to be dropped in 1965, tells us all we need to know about its importance and efficacy.

    June 28, 2014 at 10:24 pm
    • Leo

      Editor

      I’m afraid I can’t help you with a first hand source. I’m in the same boat as everyone else, at present. Maybe the sceptics are going to suggest the vision wasn’t heard of before 1917, but if it was, the date of October 13 is hardly a coincidence.

      In any event, what is beyond dispute is that the Pope composed the two prayers to Saint Michael the Archangel. The extract from the longer prayer which appears above is still very relevant to the subject of this thread.

      June 28, 2014 at 10:47 pm
  • Leo

    It’s funny how so many of the worst enemies of the Church were able to grasp very quickly what was going on in the Church in the 1960’s while those in the highest echelons of the Church deluded themselves with dreams of a “New Pentecost” or a “New Springtime”.

    Some of course weren’t a bit naive:

    “The Church has had, peacefully, its October Revolution.” -Yves Congar, Cited in An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, by Archbishop Lefebvre, p. 100

    “Vatican II is the French Revolution of the Church.” – Cardinal Suenens, cited as above

    Further up the thread I’ve mentioned the excellent little book entitled Athanasius and the Church of Our Time by Bishop Rudolf Graber, published in 1974. It informs us that The Italian Communist Party (ICP) understood what was happening during its 11th Party Congress in 1966. Bishop Graber tells us on pages 63-65:

    “In the introduction to a special number of ‘Propaganda’ (the ICP’s magazine) there is an unambiguous reference to the ‘crisis’ of the Church: ‘The extraordinary “awakening” of the Council, which is rightly compared with the Estates General of 1789, has shown the whole world that the old politico-religious Bastille is shaken to its foundations. Thus a new situation has arisen which should be met with appropriate measures. A hitherto unforeseen possibility has emerged for us to draw nearer to our final victory by means of a suitable manoeuvre.’”

    Bishop Graber informs us that in the magazine, the ICP states that here “all the opportunities are brought to light to which the inner evolution of the Church offers us” and in another section that contains a large number of references to resolutions expressed by the Council, the view is expressed that “in this way the Council itself is providing us gratis with the best means of reaching the Catholic public”. This part of the Italian Communists’ commentary closes with the words: “Never was the situation so favourable for us.”

    That’s what the Communists had to say. Now for the Freemasons, operating, like their Communist siblings, out of the kingdom of satan. The following is truly, eerily prophetic. On page 70, His Lordship informs us that:

    “The Paris journal of the Grand Orient de France, “L’Humanisme” wrote quite openly in 1968: ‘Among the pillars which collapse most easily we note the Magisterium; the infallibility , which was held to be firmly established by the First Vatican Council and which has just had to face being stormed by married people on the occasion of the publication of the encyclical Humanae vitae; the Real Eucharistic Presence, which the Church was able to impose on the medieval masses and which will disappear with the increasing inter-communion and inter-celebration of Catholic priests and Protestant pastors; the hallowed character of the priest, which come from the institution of the Sacrament of Ordination and which will be replaced by a decision for the priesthood for a trial period; the differentiation between the direction-giving Church and the black-clad (lower) clergy, whereas from now on the directions will proceed from the base of the pyramid upwards as in any democracy; the gradual disappearance of the ontological and metaphysical character of the sacraments and then the subsequent death of confession now that sin in our days has become a completely anachronistic concept handed down to us by the rigorous medieval philosophy which was in turn the heritage of Biblical pessimism.’

    L’Humanisme continues: “When the traditional structures collapse, all that remains will follow. The Church did not foresee that it would be contested in this way and it is no longer anything like prepared to absorb and assimilate this revolutionary spirit…It is not the scaffold that is awaiting the Pope, it is the rise of local Churches organising themselves democratically, rejecting the dividing-line between clergy and laymen, creating their own dogma and living in complete autonomy of Rome.

    “Soon it will no longer be possible for the Vatican to keep control over the internal motions of a great body which used to be considered homogenous…Might it not be time to return to more ‘national’ Churches?”

    That’s what the enemy were saying 46 years ago. They haven’t had much cause for disappointment since. They must be absolutely loving all this neo-Catholic New Springtime.

    June 29, 2014 at 5:47 pm
  • Leo

    As had been pointed out already, the historical contingencies, or “changed times justifies changed teaching” line has been used in the defence of Vatican II novelties. The issues of religious liberty and the dogma of there being no salvation outside the Church have seen Conciliar novelties that have flatly contradicted previous constant Church teaching, and in particular the clear, unambiguous, consistent teaching of Popes since the time of the satanic French revolution until the Council. Whatever the intent of those responsible, such novelties can safely be said to have met with much approval and enthusiasm amongst the Lodge’s battalions at the service of the kingdom of satan.

    “If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text (Gaudium et Spes) as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) it is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of countersyllabus…Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents, on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789.” Cardinal Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 381-382

    The Social Kingship of Christ is another teaching that has been virtually abandoned, no doubt to the great satisfaction of the Masonic agents of lucifer and their minions. An antichrist programme of depravity and perversion throughout the Western world offers all the evidence that is needed of what the Masonic Declaration of the Rights of Man actually stands for: revolt against God.

    In the US, the much lauded (by defenders of Dignitatis Humanae) laboratory of Americanism and Separation of Church and State, the Holocaust of surgical abortion now numbers in the region of 55 million. The promotion of sodomy throughout the world is now de facto official foreign policy in the Land of the Free, the Home of the Brave. The rest of the once civilised world is happy to follow.

    Cardinal Pie of Poitiers was one of the great defenders of the teaching of the Social Kingship of Christ in the nineteenth century. Pope Saint Pius X read his work on a daily basis. Catholics who opt for the “changing times” defence of novelty would be well advised to follow the sainted Pope’s example and read the following words of the Cardinal:

    “Hear this maxim, O you, Catholics full of temerity, who so quickly adopt the ideas and the language of your time, you who speak of reconciling the faith and of reconciling the Church with the modern spirit and with the new law. And you who accept with so much confidence the most dangerous pursuits of what our age so pridefully labels “Science,” see to what extent you are straying from the program set out by the great Apostle, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so-called” (I Tim. 6:20). But take heed. With such temerities, one is soon led farther than he first had thought. And in placing themselves on the slope of profane novelties—in obeying the currents of so-called science—many have lost the Faith.

    “Have you not often been saddened, and taken fright, my venerable brothers, on hearing the language of certain men, who believe themselves still to be sons of the Church, men who still practice occasionally as Catholics and who often approach the Lord’s Table? Do you still believe them to be sons, do you still believe them to be members of the Church, those who, wrapping themselves in such vague phrases as modern aspirations and the force of progress and civilization, proclaim the existence of a “consciousness of the laity,” of a secular and political conscience opposed to the “conscience of the Church,” against which they assume the right to react, for its correction and renewal? Ah! So many passengers, and even pilots, who, believing themselves to be yet in the barque, and playing with profane novelties and the lying science of their time, have already sunk and are in the abyss.”

    -(Homily , November 25th 1864)

    June 29, 2014 at 10:03 pm
    • Summa

      Just love that Homily 🙂

      June 29, 2014 at 10:21 pm
    • editor

      Leo,

      The concluding words of the Cardinal’s homily are chilling. There are, indeed, “so many passengers and even pilots” who believe themselves to be (for example) “priests in good standing” who may well, in fact be no such thing and, in truth, be in tremendous spiritual danger.

      No wonder the Little Flower, St Therese of Lisieux was consumed with the desire to offer her life to pray for priests in Carmel.

      June 29, 2014 at 11:03 pm
  • Miles Immaculatae

    Roratae Caeli have expressed my sentiments exactly with this title of a recent blog post:

    Who needs conspiracy theories when the Freemasons openly celebrate Vatican II in the Eternal City?

    We are accused of being crazy, paranoid conspiracy nuts. But here, here is the reality for all those with eyes to see!

    June 29, 2014 at 11:56 pm
    • editor

      Miles,

      If you click on the masonic symbol at the top of this thread, you will see that the Rorate Caeli headline/article which you quote is the source of this blog thread.

      June 30, 2014 at 12:46 am
      • Miles Immaculatae

        Oh I am a real numpty. I didn’t bother to read the RC post, if I had, I would have noticed it is reproduced here!

        July 5, 2014 at 5:57 pm
  • Leo

    If anyone is inclined to dismiss the earlier mention of the Masons’ nineteenth century Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita as fanciful conspiracy or irrelevant in this day and age, the following article might serve as a bit of an attitude adjuster.

    http://eponymousflower.blogspot.ie/2013/09/the-home-of-signismundo-malatesta.html

    June 30, 2014 at 1:20 pm
  • Christina

    I wonder if anyone else has been joining up the dots here?

    Cameron-orders-probe-happened-missing-dossier-alleged-paedophile-activity-Westminster-1980s

    Extracts from the 30th Degree Masonic oath (Catholic Encyclopedia)

    “I vow myself to the utmost to bring due punishment upon the oppressors, the usurpers and the wicked; I pledge myself never to harm a Knight Kadosh, either by word or deed . . .; I vow that if I find him as a foe in the battlefield, I will save his life, when he makes me the Sign of Distress, and that I will free him from prison and confinement upon land or water, even to the risk of my own life or my own liberty. I pledge myself to vindicate right and truth even by might and violence, if necessary and duly ordered by my regular superiors.”
    “I pledge myself to obey without hesitation any order whatever it may be of my regular Superiors in the Order”

    July 5, 2014 at 5:26 pm
  • Christina

    Sorry the link didn’t link. I must have done something wrong. Can anyone rescue it for me please? It’s from today’s (July 5th) ‘Daily Mail’.

    July 5, 2014 at 5:37 pm

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: