Showing posts with label Ultramontanism. Show all posts

Thursday, June 8, 2017

10 Years of Continuing Counter Reformation

June 2007: the first month of Continuing Counter Reformation

Required reading: Western - Eastern Roman Empire 101
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2014/09/western-eastern-roman-empire-101.html

Wlodimir Ledochowski was a Polish aristocrat who by 1906 had demonstrated such exceptional skills in international diplomacy that Jesuit Superior General Franz Xavier Wernz (under whose tutelage Pacelli had done his post graduate research in canon law) appointed him Consultor General for Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, and Poland, as well as Belgium and the Netherlands.

“Consultor General” is the equivalent of a cabinet post. It empowered Ledochowski to lace the future of his nations with alliances that lay buried like so many land-mines. This is not an unusual feat for a Jesuit strategist. Indeed, the Society of Jesus (which is the pope’s private CIA and veritable Mother of Spies) is renowned for “Orthelloizing” nations- setting them up for mutual destruction, as when Othello’s trusted but treacherous advisor Iago gloats to the audience, “Now whether he kills Cassio or Cassio him, or each do kill the other, every way makes my gain.”

(It’s foolish, in my opinion, not to suspect a covert military strategist of anything he has the authority, means, and requirement to do. To ignore him is to be conquered by his strategy, which is usually to foster ignorance of his most decisive operations.

(excerpt)

The Papacy since 1870 has been in a position where practically everything turns upon the personality of the Pontiff and his choice of advisers. There can be no more mediocre Popes under whose nominal guidance matters can go on in commonplace routine. Every successor of Peter now must make a big mark in the history of the Church for good or bad. If he is not very strong, he will be found lamentably weak. There is no longer any middle course.

Leo has been one of the strong kind. His fourteen years of reign have been devoted to building a new sort of Papacy beside rather than upon the ruins of the old structure. Considering the great difficulties and obstacles in the way of his task, proceeding even more from within than without, the result is exceptionally successful. Perhaps the outcome of his labors is best described by saying that he has shown those who thought the Papacy need no longer be taken into account in the world’s affairs because Rome has been wrestled from it that they were profoundly mistaken. The Vatican to-day wields far greater influence in Europe than it has done before since the French Revolution.

But it is a peculiarly personal influence. The next Pope will inherit only the opportunities of securing it for himself, and failing to improve these will be vastly easier than success.

It seems to be taken for granted that Cardinal Raphael Monaco la Valetta [b. February 23, 1827- d. July 14, 1896] will secure the succession. He is the doyen of the Sacred College and Secretary of the Inquisition- an amiable, unambitious priest of sixty-five, who has the very slenderest notions of or interest in the general European situation. He is extremely simple in his tastes, is not in the least stirred by all the great outside social and political problems with which Leo has striven to grapple as a sacerdotal Tory. By temperament he always belonged to the conservative wing of the college. He will assume the tiara, if elected, as its representative and opposed to the small liberal group headed by Cardinal Parocchi. If he stood by himself there would be no risk in predicting that this would be a reign under which the Papacy would lose more prestige than Leo gained for it.

It is very well understood, however, that Monaco is entirely under the control of Ledochowski, that proud, imperious, and able Pole who made Bismarck such worlds of trouble in the old Kulterkampf day and who has been able to impose his will very often upon even the present Pope. This powerful man was in a German prison when Pius IX created him a Cardinal in 1875. Next year he was released and banished, and he has since lived in Rome, devoting his great wealth and talents to building up a militant Ultramontagne party about him. His wrath at the treatment he received at the hands of Bismarck has colored all his political views. He has hated both Germany and Italy and has looked unceasingly forward to the time when French bayonets should restore the temporal power of the Vatican in the old Roman States.

If we assume that this spirited and resolute prelate will shortly be ruling the Church through its nominal head, it becomes a most anxious question how he will accept the existing political conditions of Europe which have so radically changed since 1875. The new rulers of the Germans have been at pains to show their desire to abolish the last traces of the Kulterkampf. When the pending Prussian Education bill is passed, the German Catholics will be actually stronger than they were before the May laws. During the last half year these dispatches have frequently reflected the new interest which William and his immediate entourage are displaying in the Polish question. Of course a good deal of this has arisen naturally from the contemplation of the necessity of sooner or later fighting Russia: but even more it represents the effort to allure Ledochowski into friendship with Germany by an appeal to his national sentiment. How far this has successor will be, as has been said, a most anxious question.

In any event under this new regime there would be an abrupt cessation of pastorals on Socialistic and labor problems and of poems about St. Thomas Aquinas. We should instead see the Vatican boldly embark upon the troubled waters of European diplomacy, seeking alliances and taking desperate risks upon the fortune in the next war.

“Should Old Pope Leo Die: the political tendencies of his successor. The Cardinal who would probably win the prize – his Polish supporter – affairs in France and Germany – Spurgeon’s return – Lord Lorne’s appointment",

The New York Times, January 23, 1892
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9B07E3DA1738E233A25757C2A9679C94639ED7CF&oref=slogin

Cardinal Wiseman THE DECISIVE BATTLE AGAINST PROTESTANTISM WOULD BE FOUGHT ON THE SANDS OF THE MARK OF BRANDENBURG
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/cardinal-wisemanthe-decisive-battle.html

(excerpt)

Prussia, the first Protestant Power in Germany, is the main support of German Protestantism, as, according to Moufang, France and Austria are the main supports of Catholicism. It is plain, therefore, that Austria and France were to give help against Prussia. The winged words of Cardinal Wiseman, which he uttered about 1850, that THE DECISIVE BATTLE AGAINST PROTESTANTISM WOULD BE FOUGHT ON THE SANDS OF THE MARK OF BRANDENBURG, have thus their political sense.

https://books.google.com/books?id=LZxZAAAAIAAJ&vq=wiseman&dq=Ledochowski&pg=PA295&ci=22,36,895,1528&source=bookclip&hl=en#v=onepage&q=wiseman&f=false

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/kulturkampf-1874.html

Kulturkampf 1874: The War Between Prussia and Rome
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/kulturkampf-1874.html

'But Ultramontanism is not a religious belief, it is a political system: and that political system is in my opinion essentially hostile to the principles on which the constitution of this country was established at the Reformation and at the Evolution. It has been in every age and in every country, and it still is the implacable enemy of Religious Liberty and Civil Freedom.'

Sir William Harcourt, on his appointment as Solicitor General, spoke as follows to the electors of Oxford and the world at large

http://books.google.com/books?id=LZxZAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA290&dq=Ledochowski&output=text#c_top

'Sacred Heart' of the 'Mother of War' Ultramontanism from the blog 'Good Jesuit, Bad Jesuit'http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2013/11/sacred-heart-of-mother-of-war.html

19th Century Jesuits "Fervently Ultramontane, Devoted To The Sacred Heart, Fierce Defenders Of Pope Pius IX And The 1870 Definition Of Papal Infallibility And SuspiciousOf Liberalism In All Its Varieties"
http://goodjesuitbadjesuit.blogspot.com/2013/11/19th-century-jesuits-fervently.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FZlcTj+%28Good+Jesuit%2C+Bad+Jesuit%29

In his introduction to The Cambridge Companion to the Jesuits (2008), editor Thomas Worcester realized he needed to address an imbalance in the volume: fourth-fifths of the essays addressed the history of Jesuits before their suppression in 1773. “[T]here are relatively few good studies of the Jesuits since 1814 – in any part of the world – at least compared with the abundance of excellent work done on the history of the ‘old’ Society and its ‘corporate’ culture,” Worcester explained. “In general, the Society of Jesus, for much of the century and a half from its restoration until Vatican II, was conservative and even reactionary.” (7-8)

Just one year earlier, John McGreevy, made the point even stronger in America magazine. Reviewing Gerald McKevitt’s Brokers of Culture: Italian Jesuits in the American West, 1848-1919 (Stanford, 2006), McGreevy wrote:

“19^th-century Jesuits – fervently ultramontane, devoted to the Sacred Heart, fierce defenders of Pope Pius IX and the 1870 definition of papal infallibility and suspicious of liberalism in all its varieties and the public schools that seemed to inculcate it – surely seemed unlikely role models for Jesuits and non-Jesuit scholars in the immediate postconciliar era.”

It might be difficult to identify with men whose worldview was shaped as much by the 1773-1814 suppression as by the European liberal revolutions that forced them into exile (once again) to all corners of the globe a generation later. And yet, to ignore the post-1814 Jesuits is to miss a crucial aspect of Catholic history over the last two centuries. For one thing, the story of the Jesuits in America, is a story of the Restored Society. All but one of the twenty-eight Jesuit colleges and universities in the United States today – and all of the secondary schools – were founded by Restored Jesuits. But the story of the Restored Jesuits is far broader: they were a globalizing force in the “long nineteenth century,” the age reframed by C.A. Bayly, as The Birth of the Modern World, 1780-1914 (Blackwell, 2004). 2014 marks the bicentennial year of the lifting of the Suppression. In commemoration of the Restoration, Loyola University Chicago is hosting a major conference on October 16-19, 2014. It aims to bring together junior and senior scholars to begin a conversation about the contribution to American identity of both restored Jesuits and the women religious with whom they worked in their enterprises. The conference aims at locating these initiatives within the specific experiential context of building an American nation. The stories of these men and women provide studies in what Thomas Tweed has termed Crossing and Dwelling (Harvard, 2006): the crossings and dwellings of refugees from European exclusions; transatlantic immigrants; multilingual and transnational identities; settlers in ethnic urban cores; boundary-dwellers in frontier peripheries. A copy of CFP can be found here, with a February 1, 2014 deadline for proposals.

Link (here) to US Religion

Wlodimir Ledochowski: One of the two or Three Greatest Jesuit Superior Generals
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/09/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-one-of.html

Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler, who met Father Ledochowski in 1930, wrote later that "everyone in Rome I was told that Father Ledochowski would rank as one of the two or three greatest heads of the Jesuit Order," an estimate which would group him with such men as Ignatius Loyola, [April 19, 1541 to July 31, 1556] the first [Jesuit] general, Francisco Borgia, [July 2, 1565 to October 1, 1572] the third, and [Claudius] Aquaviva, [Feb 19, 1581 to Jan 31, 1615] the fifth.

from a premature New York Times obituary of December 10, 1942

Wlodimir Ledochowski: Last of the Great Roman Generals
http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/09/wlodimr-vladimir-ledochowski-last-of.html

It was during the twenty-seven year Generalate of Father Wlodzimierz Ledochowski (1915-1942) that the traditional character of the Society received the firmest stamp and clearest definition since the Generalate of Claudio Acquaviva in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One might even say that Ledochowski insisted on fidelity to the structure of Jesuit obedience, was an almost merciless disciplinarian,and maintained a stream of instructions flowing out to the whole Society about every detail of Jesuit life and Ignatian ideals. He know exactly what Jesuits should be according to the Society’s Constitutions and traditions; and under strong hands of two quite authoritarian Popes, Pius XI and Pius XII, he reestablished the close ties that had once linked papacy and Jesuit Generalate. Ledochowski, in fact, gave renewed meaning to that old Roman nickname of the Jesuit Father General, “the Black Pope. Just as Pius XII can be described as the last of the great Roman Popes, so Ledochowski can be called the last of the great Roman Generals of the Jesuits.

p 221 Malachi Martin, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Neo-Ultramontanism - Wiki Article

Neo-ultramontanism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-ultramontanism

Neo-ultramontanism (literally the new ultramontanism) is the belief of certain Catholics, primarily during the period immediately prior to Vatican I, that papal infallibility was not restricted to a small number of papal statements but applied ipso facto (by virtue of being said by the Pope) to all papal teachings and statements.

Although few of today's Catholic Church historians distinguish between neo-ultramontanism and the more moderate ultramontanism of mainstream nineteenth-century Catholicism, there were substantial differences between the two. The neo-ultramontanes wanted to pass by decree the most extreme definition of papal infallibility possible and did not wish for debates at all. They were, indeed, regarded as imprudent by more moderate ultramontanists who won the debate at Vatican I.

Origins and history

Neo-ultramontanism as a movement dates back to the writings of Joseph de Maistre, who in Du Pape ("about the Pope"), argued essentially that what the Pope says is true to the exclusion of all other contrary truths. In the following period the ideals of neo-ultramontanism were formulated - though for many years in a quite incoherent manner - to free the Church from the power of the secular state. Many who know about it see neo-ultramontanism as the most extreme reaction to the ideas promoted by the French Revolution, which made them turn to the papacy as the last bastion of truth. Its main bastion in these early days was the French journal Univers under the leadership of Louis Veuillot.
The term "neo-ultramontanism", however, was not coined until 1863, when it was used by one of its strongest adherents, the British lay convert William G. Ward and adopted by Cardinal Henry Manning. Ward's viewpoint can be summed up in the following article by Cuthbert Butler, the best historian of Vatican I:

He held that the infallible element of bulls, encyclicals, etc., should not be restricted to their formal definitions but ran through the entire doctrinal instructions; the decrees of the Roman Congregation, if adopted by the Pope and published with his authority, thereby were stamped with the mark of infallibility, in short “his every doctrinal pronouncement is infallibly rendered by the Holy Ghost”...

During the lead-up to Vatican I the neo-ultramontanes were very well organised and included within their ranks a substantial portion of the 601 bishops who voted on the question of infallibility at that council. They were concentrated in Western Europe, but did not manage to win the debate - a fact often attributed by liberal historians to their lack of theological and historical understanding of how the doctrine of infallibility was first proposed.

After Vatican I, neo-ultramontanism as a semi-organised movement declined as its chief adherents were not replaced. Pope Leo XIII never attempted to exercise infallibility and by the time of his death all the neo-ultramontane publications had been closed down or had changed their views on what was now "history" (Vatican I and the debates within it). However, some liberal theologians and historians have argued since the beginning of John Paul II's papacy that a view of papal infallibility analogous to that proposed by neo-ultramontanes has made a comeback. This has been especially true since the controversy surrounding the aftermath of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis in 1994 and The Tablet's article about that letter On Not Inventing Doctrine published a year and a half later. However, it ought to be emphasised that John Paul II and Benedict XVI have never cited nineteenth-century neo-ultramontanists as influences on their theological or ecclesiological viewpoints.

Criticism of term

Many Catholic Church historians are critical of the term "neo-ultramontanism" because they believe that it fails to clarify clearly the position of those who advocated it and that it was never in any general use: always being confined to a few of either its staunchest advocates or to strong opponents of its beliefs like Lord Acton.

External links

Ultramontanism - Wiki Article

Ultramontanism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultramontanism

An image of Pope Alexander I. Ultramontane Catholics emphasized the authority of the Pope over temporal affairs of civil governments as well as the spiritual affairs of the Church.

Ultramontanism is a religious belief found within the Catholic Church that places strong emphasis on the prerogatives and powers of the Pope.

History

The term originates in ecclesiastical language from the Middle Ages: when a non-Italian man was elected to the papacy, he was said to be papa ultramontano, that is, a Pope from beyond the mountains (referring to the Alps). Foreign students at medieval Italian universities were also referred to as ultramontanes.

The word was revived but the meaning reversed after the Protestant Reformation in France, to indicate the 'man beyond the mountains' located in Italy. In France, the name ultramontain was applied to people who supported papal authority in French political affairs, as opposed to the Gallican and Jansenist factions of the indigenous French Catholic Church. The term was intended to be insulting, or at least to imply a lack of true patriotism.

From the 17th century, ultramontanism became closely associated with the Jesuits, who defended the superiority of Popes over councils and kings, even in temporal questions.

In the 18th century the word passed to Germany (Josephinism and Febronianism), where it acquired a much wider significance, being applicable to all the conflicts between Church and State, the supporters of the Church being called Ultramontanes. In Great Britain and Ireland, it was a reaction to Cisalpinism, the stance of moderate lay Catholics who sought to make patriotic concessions to the Protestant state to achieve Catholic emancipation.

The word ultramontanism was revived in the context of the French Third Republic as a general insulting term for policies advocating the involvement of the Roman Catholic Church in the policies of the French government, in opposition to laïcité.

In the above cases, the ultramontanist movement acted as a counterbalance to growing power of the state in Europe. Roman Catholic apologists argued that if the Pope has ultimate authority in the Church, then national churches would be more immune to interference from their governments.
Within the Roman Catholic Church, Ultramontanism achieved victory over conciliarism at the First Vatican Council with the pronouncement of papal infallibility (the ability of the pope to define dogmas free from error ex cathedra) and of papal supremacy, i.e., supreme, full, immediate, and universal ordinary jurisdiction of the Pope. Other Christian groups outside the Catholic Church declared this as the triumph of what they termed "the heresy of Ultramontanism." It was specifically decried in the Declaration of the Catholic Congress at Munich, in the Theses of Bonn, and in the Declaration of Utrecht, which became the foundational documents of Old Catholics (Altkatholische) who split with Rome over the declaration on infallibility and supremacy, joining the Old Episcopal Order Catholic See of Utrecht, which had been independent from Rome since 1723.

Italian unification under the leadership of Giuseppe Mazzini and Giuseppe Garibaldi dissolved the political entity of the Papal States in 1870. Thus, as a result of the 1929 Lateran Treaty which established a Concordat between the Holy See and the nation of Italy, the secular power of the Bishop of Rome, i.e., the Pope, was reduced to the one square mile of Vatican City, the smallest sovereign nation on earth. Prior to the demise of the Papal States, the First Vatican Council had been convened by Pope Pius IX.

After Italian Unification and the abrupt (and unofficial) end of the First Vatican Council in 1870 because of the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War, the Ultramontanist movement and the opposing Conciliarism became obsolete to a large extent. However, some very extreme tendencies of a minority of adherents to Ultramontanism—especially those attributing to the Roman Pontiff, even in his private opinions, absolute infallibility even in matters beyond faith and morals, and impeccability—survived and were eagerly used by opponents of the Catholic Church and papacy before the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) for use in their propaganda. These extreme tendencies, however, were never supported by the First Vatican Council's dogma of 1870 of papal infallibility and primacy, but are rather inspired by erroneous private opinions of some Roman Catholic laymen who tend to identify themselves completely with the Holy See.

[Note this wiki article has a SERIOUS gap insofar as leaving out the conflict between Rome and Protestant Germany. ]

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/cardinal-wisemanthe-decisive-battle.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/kulturkampf-1874.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2009/07/wlodimir-ledochowski-kulturkampf_17.html

At the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) the debate on papal primacy and authority re-emerged,^{[citation needed]} and in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium, the Roman Catholic Church's teaching on the authority of the Pope, bishops and councils was further elaborated. The post-conciliar position of the Apostolic See did not deny any of the previous dogmas of papal infallibility or papal primacy; rather, it shifted emphasis from structural and organizational authority to doctrinal teaching authority (also known as the Magisterium). Papal Magisterium, i.e., Papal teaching authority, was defined in Lumen Gentium #25 and later codified in the 1983 revision of Canon Law.

Controversy

Some^[who?] may claim the Catholic Social Teaching (see Distributism) of subsidiarity contradicts Ultramontanism and accuse it of decentralizing the Roman Catholic Church, whereas others^[who?] defend it as merely a bureaucratic adjustment to give more pastoral responsibility to local bishops and priests of local parishes. However, subsidiarity involves the distribution of authority in structures outside of the Church's clergy and thus does not contradict Ultramontanism.
Challenges to Ultramontanism have remained strong within and outside of Roman jurisdiction^{[citation needed]}. Ultramontanism has particularly overshadowed ecumenical work between the Roman Catholic Church and both Lutherans and Anglicans^{[citation needed]}. The joint Anglican-Roman Catholic International Consultation published The Gift of Authority (see external links below) in 1998 and highlights agreements and differences on these issues.

Position of other Apostolic Churches

Ultramontanism is not recognised by either the Eastern Orthodox communion, the Oriental Orthodox communion, or the Church of the East, which view it as an innovation unsupported by Scripture and Tradition. These Churches regard the Pope as having been primus inter pares when the two churches were in communion, and do not recognize the doctrines of infallibility or the Pope's alleged universal jurisdiction over patriarchates and autocephalous Churches other than that of Rome, except insofar as this is part of the concept of primus inter pares^{[citation needed]}

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

The Plausible Falling Out between Angelo Francois Mariani and the Vatican

The 1914+ Pharma-Tobacco 'Drug War' Market Protection Scheme tied together with the Vatican's 20th Century Counter Reformation War of Revenge Against Eastern Germany & Poland for the Reformation and the 1573 Warsaw Confederation Polish stand for religious toleration against the 1572 St Bartholomew's Day Massacre

Note the timing of the 2nd Vatican award to Coca popularizer - creator of Vin Coca Mariani -- Angelo Francois Mariani in January 1904, mere months before the start of the nonsensical anti cocaine in any form hysteria through the USDA & AMA's Harvey Wiley - May 1904.

Such would suggest a falling out between Mariani and the Vatican, and the latter's control of society through its various controlled secretive societies, such as College fraternities.

Angelo Francois Mariani December 17, 1838 - April 1, 1914

Vin Mariani- first sold 1863

banned cir 1914

after simplistic anti cocaine political campaign starting in the United States via its USDA by 1905

Pope Leo XIII award to Mariani January 1898

Pope Pius X award to Mariani January 1904

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2008/07/roman-catholic-church-cocaine.html

What I believe the falling out was over- their revealing their plans for the WW1-WW2 St Bartholomew Day's Massacre Replay for Eastern Germany and the lands of Poland.

Frenchman. Angry about Germany taking Alsace Lorraine- the eastern tip of France? Guess what we have planned for the eastern portion of Germany!

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowskis-goal.html

But that would mean Germany starting and loosing an exceptionally brutal war- thus by extension, that would mean horrible things to be done to Poland.

http://ronsview.org/2012/01/16/forgotten-land-and-bloodlands/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Bartholomew%27s_Day_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Confederation

A falling out between Angelo Francois Mariani and a powerful entity may be suggested by the circumstances of his April 1, 1914 death; it was the subject of a police report. The death was interesting enough to a Chas Vermeulen Windsant of Amsterdam, Holland, that in Spring 1978 upon discovering the story of Mariani, he initially sought to make his still unpublished biographical project of Mariani a 'quasi-fictional account' of the death.

http://southmallblogger.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-death-of-angelo-francois-mariani.html

In the years leading up to the Summer 1914 start of World War 1, many people in France were angry at Bismarck's 2nd Reich for seizing the provinces of Alsace-Lorraine from France in 1871 at the end of the Franco-Prussian War and the creation of the 2nd Reich of united Deutschland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Prussian_War

(excerpt)

The Franco-Prussian War or Franco-German War (German: Deutsch-Französischer Krieg, lit. German-French War, French: Guerre franco-allemande, lit. French-German War), often referred to in France as the War of 1870 (19 July 1870 – 10 May 1871), was a conflict between the Second French Empire and the German states of the North German Confederation led by the Kingdom of Prussia. The conflict emerged from tensions caused by German unification. Prussian chancellor Otto von Bismarck planned to provoke a French attack in order to draw the southern German states—Baden, Württemberg, Bavaria and Hesse-Darmstadt—into an alliance with the Prussian dominated North German Confederation.

Bismarck adroitly created a diplomatic crisis over the succession to the Spanish throne, then rewrote a dispatch about a meeting between king William of Prussia and the French foreign minister, to make it appear that the French had been insulted. The French press and parliament demanded a war, which the generals of Napoleon III assured him that France would win. Napoleon and his Prime Minister, Émile Ollivier, for their parts sought war to solve political disunity in France. On 16 July 1870, the French parliament voted to declare war and hostilities began three days later. The German coalition mobilised its troops much more quickly than the French and rapidly invaded northeastern France. The German forces were superior in numbers, had better training and leadership and made more effective use of modern technology, particularly railroads and artillery.

A series of swift Prussian and German victories in eastern France, culminating at the Battle of Sedan and the Siege of Metz saw the French army decisively defeated; Napoleon III was captured at Sedan on 2 September. The war continued, after the Third Republic was declared in Paris 4 September, under the Government of National Defence and Adolphe Thiers. For the next five months the German forces fought and defeated new French armies in northern France. Following the Siege of Paris, the capital fell on 28 January 1871. The German states proclaimed their union as the German Empire under the Prussian king, Wilhelm I, uniting Germany as a nation-state. The Treaty of Frankfurt of 10 May 1871 gave Germany most of Alsace and some parts of Lorraine, which became the Imperial territory of Alsace-Lorraine (Reichsland Elsaß-Lothringen).

Following defeat, a revolutionary uprising called the Paris Commune seized power in the capital and held it for two months, until it was bloodily suppressed by the regular French army at the end of May 1871. The unification of Germany upset the European balance of power that had existed since the Congress of Vienna in 1815 and Bismarck maintained great authority in international affairs for two decades. French determination to regain Alsace-Lorraine and fear of another Franco-German war, along with British concern over the balance of power, became factors in the causes of World War I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alsace-Lorraine

(excerpt)

The Imperial Territory of Alsace-Lorraine (German: Reichsland Elsaß-Lothringen, or Elsass-Lothringen), was a territory created by the German Empire in 1871 after it annexed most of Alsace and the Moselle department of Lorraine following its victory in the Franco-Prussian War. The Alsatian part lay in the Rhine Valley on the west bank of the Rhine River and east of the Vosges Mountains. The Lorraine section was in the upper Moselle valley to the north of the Vosges.

The Imperial territory of Alsace-Lorraine was made up of 93% of Alsace (7% remained French) and 26% of Lorraine (74% remained French). For historical reasons, specific legal dispositions are still applied in the territory in the form of a local law. In relation to its special legal status, since its reversion to France following World War I, the territory has been referred to administratively as Alsace-Moselle.^[1]

The newly created German Empire's demand of territory from France in the aftermath of its victory in the Franco-Prussian War was not simply a punitive measure. The transfer was controversial even among the Germans themselves - German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck was strongly opposed to a transfer of territory that he knew would provoke permanent French enmity towards the new State.^{[citation needed]} However, German Emperor Wilhelm I eventually sided with Helmuth von Moltke the Elder and other Prussian generals and others who argued that a westward shift in the new Franco-German border was necessary and desirable for a number of reasons. From a ethnicistic perspective, the transfer seemed justified, since most of the lands that were annexed were populated by people who spoke Alemannic German dialects. From a military perspective, shifting the Franco-German frontier away from the Rhine would give the Germans a strategic advantage over the French, especially by early 1870s military standards and thinking. Indeed, thanks to this annexation, the Germans took control of the fortifications of Metz, a French-speaking town, and also of most of the iron resources available in the region.

However, domestic politics of the new Empire might have been the decisive factor. Although it was effectively led by Prussia, the German Empire was a new and highly decentralized creation. The new arrangement left many senior Prussian generals with serious misgivings about leading diverse military forces to guard a pre-war frontier that, except for the northernmost section, was part of two other states of the new Empire – Baden and Bavaria. As recently as the 1866 Austro-Prussian War, these states had been Prussia's enemies. Both states, but especially Bavaria had been given substantial concessions with regards to local autonomy in the new Empire's constitution, including a great deal of autonomy over military matters. For this reason, the Prussian General Staff argued that it was prudent and necessary that the new Empire's frontier with France be under their direct control.^{[citation needed]} Creating a new Imperial Territory (Reichsland) out of formerly French territory would achieve this goal: although a Reichsland would not be part of the Kingdom of Prussia, being governed directly from Berlin it would be under Prussian control. Thus, by annexing territory, Berlin was able to avoid delicate negotiations with Baden and Bavaria on such matters as construction and control of new fortifications, etc. The governments of Baden and Bavaria, naturally, were in favour of moving the French border away from their territories.

Memories of the Napoleonic Wars were still quite fresh in the 1870s. Right up until the Franco-Prussian War, the French had maintained a long-standing desire to establish their entire eastern frontier on the Rhine, and thus they were viewed by most 19th century Germans as an aggressive people. In the years prior to 1870, it is arguable that the Germans feared the French more than the French feared the Germans. Many Germans at the time thought creation of the new Empire in itself would be enough to earn permanent French enmity, and thus desired a defensible border with their old enemy. Any additional enmity that would be earned from territorial concessions was downplayed as marginal and insignificant in the overall scheme of things.

The annexed area consisted of the northern part of Lorraine, along with Alsace. The area around the town of Belfort (now the French département of Territoire de Belfort) was unaffected, because its inhabitants were predominantly French speakers and because Belfort had been defended by Colonel Denfert-Rochereau, who surrendered only after receiving orders from Paris. The town of Montbéliard and its surrounding area to the south of Belfort, which have been part of the Doubs department since 1816, and therefore were not considered part of Alsace, were not included, despite the fact that they were a Protestant enclave, as it belonged to Württemberg from 1397 to 1806. This area corresponded to the French départements of Bas-Rhin (in its entirety), Haut-Rhin (except the area of Belfort and Montbéliard), and a small area in the northeast of the Vosges département, all of which made up Alsace, and the départements of Moselle (four-fifths of it) and the northeast of Meurthe (one-third of Meurthe), which were the eastern part of Lorraine.

The remaining département of Meurthe was joined with the westernmost part of Moselle which had escaped German annexation to form the new département of Meurthe-et-Moselle.

The new border between France and Germany mainly followed the geolinguistic divide between Romance and Germanic dialects, except in a few valleys of the Alsatian side of the Vosges mountains, the city of Metz and in the area of Château-Salins (formerly in the Meurthe département), which were annexed by Germany despite the fact that people there spoke French.^[5] In 1900, 11.6% of the population of Alsace-Lorraine spoke French as their first language (11.0% in 1905, 10.9% in 1910).

The fact that small francophone areas were affected was used in France to denounce the new border as hypocrisy, since Germany had justified them by the native Germanic dialects and culture of the inhabitants, which was true for the majority of Alsace-Lorraine. However, the German administration was tolerant of the use of the French language, and French was permitted as an official language and school language in those areas where it was spoken by a majority.

The Treaty of Frankfurt gave the residents of the region until October 1, 1872 to choose between emigrating to France or remaining in the region and having their nationality legally changed to German. About 161,000 persons, i.e., around 10.4% of the residents of Alsace-Lorraine opted for French citizenship (the so-called Optanden), however, only about 50,000 actually emigrated while the rest acquired German citizenship.^[6]

The "being French" feeling stayed strong at least during the first sixteen years of the annexation. During the Reichstag elections, the fifteen deputies of 1874, 1881, 1884 (but one) and 1887 were called protester deputies (fr: députés protestataires) because they expressed to the Parliament their opposition to the annexation by means of the 1874 motion in French language: « May it please the Reichstag to decide that the populations of Alsace-Lorraine that were annexed, without having been consulted, to the German Reich by the treaty of Frankfurt have to come out particularly about this annexation. »^[7] The infamous Saverne Affair put a severe strain on the relationship between the people of Alsace-Lorraine and the rest of the German Empire.

Under the German Empire of 1871-1918, the territory constituted the Reichsland or Imperial Province of Elsass-Lothringen. The area was administered directly by the imperial government in Berlin and was granted some measure of autonomy in 1911. This included its constitution and state assembly, its own flag, and the Elsässisches Fahnenlied as its anthem.

Alsace-Lorraine was largely Roman Catholic. In contrast, the territories in north-eastern Germany - were majority Protestant- except of course for the Polish majority Province Posen (Poznan), which had only been under German rule since the 1790s with the final partitions of Poland under Frederick and Catherine of Prussia and Russia; plus significant Roman catholic minorities, if not majorities in the Warmia region in western East Prussia, and portions of Upper Silesia, namely the Opole region.

The Vatican already had a long standing vendetta against northern and eastern Germany over the Protestant Reformation and had long lusted to return such lands to the Roman Catholic fold.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/cardinal-wisemanthe-decisive-battle.html

Prussia, the first Protestant Power in Germany, is the main support of German Protestantism, as, according to Moufang, France and Austria are the main supports of Catholicism. It is plain, therefore, that Austria and France were to give help against Prussia. The winged words of Cardinal Wiseman, which he uttered about 1850, that THE DECISIVE BATTLE AGAINST PROTESTANTISM WOULD BE FOUGHT ON THE SANDS OF THE MARK OF BRANDENBURG, have thus their political sense http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/kulturkampf-1874.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/kulturkampf-1874.html

Sir William Harcourt, on his appointment as Solicitor General, spoke as follows to the electors of Oxford and the world at large:—

'But Ultramontanism is not a religious belief, it is a political system: and that political system is in my opinion essentially hostile to the principles on which the constitution of this country was established at the Reformation and at the Evolution. It has been in every age and in every country, and it still is the implacable enemy of Religious Liberty and Civil Freedom.'

The 1870s and the creation of the Protestant-Lutheran led 2nd Reich led to a renewed conflict with the Vatican surrounding Deutsch-land's Falk legislation and the conflict in particular with Mieczyslaw Ledochowski, who was arrested by Bismarck's regime and imprisoned for about 2 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mieczys%C5%82aw_Halka_Led%C3%B3chowski

Mieczysław Halka Ledóchowski, (29 October 1822 – 22 July 1902) was born in Górki (near Sandomierz) in Russian controlled Congress Poland^[1] to Count Josef Ledóchowski and Maria Zakrzewska. He was uncle to such high-ranking and notable religious as Saint Ursula Ledóchowska, the Blessed Maria Teresia (Theresa) Ledóchowska and Father Wlodimir Ledóchowski, General Superior of the Society of Jesus.

After studying at Radom and Warsaw, he entered the Jesuit Accademia dei Nobili Ecclesiastici in Rome in 1842, and was ordained priest on 13 July 1845. He became domestic prelate of Pope Pius IX in 1846, auditor of the papal nunciature at Lisbon in 1847, Apostolic delegate to Colombia and Chile in 1856, nuncio at Brussels and titular Archbishop of Thebes in 1861, and finally in December 1865 became Archbishop of Poznań and Gniezno and Primate of Poland (both cities then a part of the Prussian Province of Posen).

In 1873, the Prussian government began the implementation of Kulturkampf policies against the influence of the Roman Catholic Church and in the aftermath forbade the use of Polish in instruction in the Province of Posen. Archbishop Ledóchowski urgently protested this order, and ultimately issued a circular ordering the religion teachers at higher educational institutes to use German in their teachings to the higher classes but to preserve Polish in their teachings to the lower classes.^{[citation needed]}

The religious instructors obediently followed the archbishop's order and were subsequently deposed by the Prussian government. After repeated fines for outlawed activity, the government demanded Ledóchowski's resignation. The archbishop responded that no temporal court could deprive him of an office granted to him by God, and he was jailed in the Ostrowo dungeon in February 1874.^{[citation needed]}

In March 1875 the Pope appointed him as Cardinal. The following month the government declared him as deposed. In 1875, Ledóchowski was released and banished and thereafter ruled his see from Rome. He resigned in 1885. In 1892 he became Prefect of the Propaganda, an office which he held until his death. An official reconciliation between the cardinal and the Prussian government reportedly took place when Emperor Wilhelm II visited Rome in 1893.

Subsequently, Mieczyslaw Ledochowski sought revenge against Germany- in particular its Protestant majority areas of the German State of Prussia:

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/10/washington-post-on-cardinal-mieczyslaw.html

This is what the NY Times published in 1892: The New York Times On the Papacy and Cardinal Mieczyslaw Ledochowski

It is very well understood, however, that Monaco is entirely under the control of Ledochowski, that proud, imperious, and able Pole who made Bismarck such worlds of trouble in the old Kulterkampf day and who has been able to impose his will very often upon even the present Pope. This powerful man was in a German prison when Pius IX created him a Cardinal in 1875. Next year he was released and banished, and he has since lived in Rome, devoting his great wealth and talents to building up a militant Ultramontagne party about him. His wrath at the treatment he received at the hands of Bismarck has colored all his political views. He has hated both Germany and Italy and has looked unceasingly forward to the time when French bayonets should restore the temporal power of the Vatican in the old Roman States.

If we assume that this spirited and resolute prelate will shortly be ruling the Church through its nominal head, it becomes a most anxious question how he will accept the existing political conditions of Europe which have so radically changed since 1875. The new rulers of the Germans have been at pains to show their desire to abolish the last traces of the Kulterkampf. When the pending Prussian Education bill is passed, the German Catholics will be actually stronger than they were before the May laws. During the last half year these dispatches have frequently reflected the new interest which William and his immediate entourage are displaying in the Polish question. Of course a good deal of this has arisen naturally from the contemplation of the necessity of sooner or later fighting Russia: but even more it represents the effort to allure Ledochowski into friendship with Germany by an appeal to his national sentiment. How far this has successor will be, as has been said, a most anxious question.

In any event under this new regime there would be an abrupt cessation of pastorals on Socialistic and labor problems and of poems about St. Thomas Aquinas. We should instead see the Vatican boldly embark upon the troubled waters of European diplomacy, seeking alliances and taking desperate risks upon the fortune in the next war.

The Vatican ultramontagne war agenda is to be largely engineered via Mieczyslaw's nephew Wlodimir Ledochowski.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-mission.html

Central to this agenda is the westward shift of Poland.

This meant wiping Eastern Germany and [east] Prussia off the map, with the establishment of the Oder-Neisse line as the border between Germany and Poland - as the aim of the counter reformation -- via an evil agenda against a multitude of groups.

And it meant ensuring that the lands of eastern Poland - since the late 1700s under Moscovite occupation - remain under Moscovite rule as per the Great Schism Line of 1054- all for a grand geo-political scheme involving the latter planned conversion of Russia. To that latter end, a West Ukrainian nationalist movement is engineered to wipe out the Polish identity of the Ruthenian peoples, while an alliance system and series of regimes are engineered to set up Germany as the instigator and looser of a vicious war.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2007/06/wlodimir-vladimir-ledochowski-according.html

Tupper Saussy wrote a fascinating book on the origins and nature of the U.S .government as a vessel of the Roman Catholic Church- particularly the “Black Pope” Superior General of the Jesuit Order. During the critical years of the origins of the major wars of the 20th century, the Black Pope was Wlodimir Ledochowski:

The Jesuits were very busy between the crucial years (as you would call them) 1913-1920. I think a better framing would be between 1915-1942. These were the years of the Generalate of Vladimir Ledochowski, whom I’m tempted to regard as the single most important man of the 20^th century. Check him out in the New Catholic Encyclopedia.

His obituary in the NY Times in December 1942 said he did “many great and important things” which future historians would write about. Yet I can’t find any book by any historian about any great and important things he did. I think he was a power behind radio and film, and we have evidence that he funded Adolph Hitler to unite Germany under a Catholic dictator. [See 15 Brienner Strasse for more details.]

Ledochowski’s career needs to be carefully studied. Remember, though, that you’re tracking a man who covers his tracks. It won’t be easy.

Tupper Saussy vol 1 no 1

15 Brienner Strasse excerpts

15 Brienner Strasse is named for the address of the Papal nucio to Bavaria where Pacelli received his first visit from a then struggling Austrian revolutionary who wanted to become the charismatic dictator of Germany, Adolph Hitler. Accordingly:

Immediately upon assuming his Generalate, Vladimir (Wlodimir) Ledochowski fled Rome (Austria, after all, was now at war with Italy) and set up office with two assistants in his mother’s castle at Zizers, Switzerland.

In 1917, Ledochowski invited Mathias Erzberger, a deputy from the German Catholic Center Party for a secret meeting.

Erzberger later reported to friends that the General had persuaded him to support a strategy of destroying the unified Reich under the Protestant Kaiser Wilhelm II in order to bring the Catholic nations of central and eastern Europe together in a pan-German federation under a charismatic dictator charged with subduing the communist menace from the east.

Dr. Hans Carossa, documenting the deputy’s fact patterns after Zizers, observed that “Every political maneuver that Erzberger has engaged in since his discussion with the Jesuit General has only served to advance this Jesuit political strategy.” (Manfred Barthel, The Jesuits, William Morrow, p. 254-255)
Whose Who at Number 15?

Eighty-two years ago, 15 Brienner Strasse housed three vital players in world politics: Eugenio Pacelli, Archbishop of Sardi, nuncio to Bavaria, and administrator of the Vatican’s foreign affairs; his housekeeper, a Holy Cross nun named Pascalina; and his Jesuit speech-writer Robert Lieber.

Eugenio Pacelli had served in the Church’s diplomatic service since his ordination in 1899. His international sensibilities had been mentioned by the Jesuits, one of whom – Vladimir (Wlodimir) Ledochowski – he idolized. I say “idolized” because this is the exact word an elderly Jesuit I interviewed in Rome employed to describe Pacelli’s relationship to Ledochowski. He’d known both figures personally.

Wlodimir Ledochowski was a Polish aristocrat who by 1906 had demonstrated such exceptional skills in international diplomacy that Jesuit Superior General Franz Xavier Wernz (under whose tutelage Pacelli had done his prost graduate research in canon law) appointed him Consultor General for Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, and Poland, as well as Belgium and the Netherlands.

“Consultor General” is the equivalent of a cabinet post. It empowered Ledochowski to lace the future of his nations with alliances that lay buried like so many land-mines. This is not an unusual feat for a Jesuit strategist. Indeed, the Society of Jesus (which is the pope’s private CIA and veritable Mother of Spies) is renowned for “Orthelloizing” nations- setting them up for mutual destruction, as when Othello’s trusted but treacherous advisor Iago gloats to the audience, “Now whether he kills Cassio or Cassio him, or each do kill the other, every way makes my gain.”

(It’s foolish, in my opinion, not to suspect a covert military strategist of anything he has the authority, means, and requirement to do. To ignore him is to be conquered by his strategy, which is usually to foster ignorance of his most decisive operations.

Triggering World War

Most historians agree that the first World War was triggered by the Serbian Concordat of June 1914. Eugenio Pacelli was the Concordat's acknowledged author, but Vladimir Ledochowski had authority, means, and requirement to ghost it.

The Serbian Concordat promised (a) Vatican support of Serbia's liberation from Roman Catholic Austria-Hungary, while (b) pitting Roman Catholic evangelism against the Serbian state religion, Eastern Orthodoxy, a faith that denies the supremacy of the Roman papacy.

Such a policy was sure to provoke belligerency between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, just as Jesuit military strategy created enmity between America and Great Britain to incite a Revolution that resulted in the world's first republic governable by Roman Catholic laypersons. The underlying purpose of the Serbian Concordat, like the Declaration of Independence, was to restructure the world according to the requirements of Rome. What those requirements were we shall learn presently.

Four days after Eugenio Pacelli signed the Concordat, a Serbian terrorist assassinated the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. Within weeks, nations with no more reason to make war than the alliances they had signed began outfitting their respective soldiery for what looked like Armageddon.

Reorganization

Death hit the Vatican, too. On August 19, 1914, Jesuit General Wernz died suddenly, followed the next day by Pope Pius X—of heartbreak, it was rumored, over the world's disintegration. To succeed Pius, the college of cardinals chose a professional diplomat, Giacomo della Chiesa, who assumed the name Benedict XV.

It took the Jesuits six months to elect a Superior General to succeed Wernz. There's no more powerful political office on earth than Superior General of the Society of Jesus. It commands absolute, unquestioned obedience. The proposition that Jesus Christ is to be seen in the person of the Superior General is repeated no less than five hundred times in the Society's Constitutions.

Vladimir Ledochowski was chosen General by his Jesuit electors.

The man idolized by Eugenio Pacelli now had full authority to cause America to desire war against Germany. We have heard many reasons why America entered World War I. Statesmen argued that it was “the war to end all wars,” while pacifists charged it was a war to support British imperialism. Actual outcome points to another, less apparent yet more practical reason.

The Purpose of World War I

Immediately upon assuming his Generalate, Vladimir Ledochowski fled Rome (Austria, after all, was now at war with Italy) and set up office with two assistants in his mother's castle at Zizers, Switzerland.

In 1917, Ledochowski invited Mathias Erzberger, a deputy from the German Catholic Center party, to Zizers for a secret meeting

Erzberger later reported to friends that the General had persuaded him to support a strategy of destroying the unified Reich under the Protestant Kaiser Wilhelm II in order to bring the Catholic nations of central and eastern Europe together in a pan-German federation under a charismatic dictator charged with subduing the communist menace from the east.

Dr. Hans Carossa, documenting the deputy's fact patterns after Zizers, observed that “Every political maneuver that Erzberger has engaged in since his discussion with the Jesuit General has only served to advance this Jesuit political strategy.” (Manfred Barthel, The Jesuits, William Morrow, p. 254-5)

Means A: The Lusitania

As much as Ledochowski needed to mobilize America against Germany, America was disinterested in European events. In fact, President Woodrow Wilson repeatedly declared that Europe's calamities were of absolutely no concern to Americans.

But soon after Ledochowski ensconced in Zizers (locals pronounce it "Caesar's"), things started going his way. A German submarine sank the RMS Lusitania off the coast of Ireland with 128 Americans aboard.

This act, wrote Jim Marrs in his study of clandestine governments (Rule By Secrecy, HarperCollins, 2000), “set off a firestorm of anti-German feeling throughout the United States, fanned by the Rockefeller-[J.P.] Morgan dominated press.”

Marrs added that “Morgan was the Rothschilds' American representative—some say partner.”

The house of Rothschild is bound by fiduciary duty to facilitate the Jesuit General's needs. According to Encyclopedia Judaica, the Rothschilds are “Guardians of the Vatican Treasury.”

The Rothschild press used the Lusitania to foment hatred among Americans toward “the hideous Hun.” But a stunt even more dramatic was needed to secure a declaration of war.

Means B: The Zimmerman Telegram

War resulted from the famous Zimmerman Telegram, which the Rothschild press sensationally published in America on March 1, 1917

In the telegram, supposedly decoded by British interceptors, German foreign minister Arthur Zimmermann proposed to the German ambassador in Mexico a German-Mexican alliance against the United States in which Germany would support the Mexican recapture of territory in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.

A German official talking secretly of invading Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico brought the war suddenly home

Normally, when the alleged proponent of such an explosive notion—true or not—is asked for verification, he follows good diplomatic form and categorically denies responsibility. Not Arthur Zimmermann. At a Berlin news conference on March 3rd, a reporter for the Hearst papers—which columnist George Seldes terms "the most pro-Catholic press in America”—caught Zimmermann's attention and stated: “Of course Your Excellency will deny this story.” Zimmermann replied, “I cannot deny it. It is true.”

Is this a script, or what?

Zimmermann's inexplicable admission (and shamefully unprofessional, unless done in obedience to the General or the Rothschilds) gave President Wilson no alternative but to ask Congress for precisely what Vladimir Ledochowski desired: a declaration that a state of war existed with Germany.

Congress complied on April 6, the Guardians of the Vatican Treasury cranked out the credit (through the Rothschilds' brand new Federal Reserve), and over the next year and a half, more than 364,000 American lives were sacrificed (out of 4,355,000 mobilized) to Ledochowski's objective of destroying the Reich and replacing its Protestant Kaiser with a charismatic dictator.

Came Armistice Day, November 11, 1918, the Reich was devastated . The Kaiser had fled for the safety of Holland.

Power-drunk from overthrowing czarist Russia, Bolshevik mobs flying red flags overran Bavaria. All Munich's diplomatic legations returned to their home countries. The Vatican nunciature alone remained.

On June 28, 1919, the Allies presented the Treaty of Versailles for Germany to sign. The Diktat, as Germans called it (“dictated peace”), only perfected their devastation—forcing them to accept sole responsibility for the war, ripping great chunks of territory away from the Reich, and reducing German naval and military power to practically nil

The moment had arrived for the introduction of Vladimir Ledochowski's “charismatic dictator.”

He entered history at 15 Brienner Strasse late one blustery night during the winter following the Diktat...

Mission Accomplished

Sister Pascalina recalled the moment for her biographers, Paul Murphy and Rene Arlington (La Popessa, Viking, 1983).

The nunciature was asleep. Pascalina heard knocking at the door. She answered to find a young Austrian soldier standing there, a corporal and a Catholic, bearing a letter of introduction from a leading Bavarian politician citing him for acts of bravery during the war.

Pascalina issued the young man into the sitting room and awoke Archbishop Pacelli. Their meeting went fast. The soldier vowed to check the spread of atheistic communism in Munich and elsewhere.

Pascalina heard Pacelli say, “Munich has been good to me, so has Germany. I pray Almighty God that this land remain a holy land, in the hands of Our Lord, and free of communism.”

She then saw Pacelli give the soldier “a large cache of Church money to aid the rising revolutionary and his small, struggling band of anticommunists.”

“Go, quell the devil's works,” the archbishop told him. “Help spread the love of Almighty God.”

Sister Pascalina never forgot the young soldier's face or his name—Adolf Hitler.

Reflections

Of course, in 1939 Eugenio Paceli was elected Pope Pius XII, whom John Paul II moved toward sainthood with beatification in 1998.

Catholic author and Cambridge scholar John Cornwell contends in Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII (Viking, 1999) that Pacelli’s tactical subservience to Hitler, particularly his refusal to intercede with the Fuhrer’s treatment if the Jews, depended upon “a fatal combination of high spiritual aspirations in conflict with soaring ambition for power and control.” In other words, “Ignore Vladimir (Wlodimir) Ledochowski; look no further then His Holiness, in the same way you would look no further than Oswald, Ray, Koresh, or McVeigh.”

Although it fails to consider the pope’s very real legal relationship to the man he idolized (). Cornwll’s estimable book is still our most revealing examination of Pacelli’s inner career.

Scholars need to learn that the Church is perennially at war with every no Catholic, a fact proved by the existence and record of the Jesuits. His task of defending the sacraments places the Superior General in control of the entire Church Militant. In certain circumstances, he is entitled to require obedience to the pope for the sake of Rome.

And so I submit that the policies of Pius XII were not his to make but rather those of Vladimir (Wlodimir) Ledochowski. The ‘society of Jesus’ will never agree to this I know. As Manfred Barthel has explained, “Jesuit sources always blandly insist that the General concerned himself entirely with spiritual and administrative matters and never gave politics a thought.”

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2009/11/along-amber-path-7_7355.html

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2009/07/wlodimir-ledochowski-kulturkampf_17.html

Rome gets its way re-arranging the religious map of Europe at the expense of Protestants, Jews and 'liberal' (aka insufficiently loyal to Rome) Catholics. Best known is the Nazi extermination of the Jewish peoples. Lesser known is the Nazi extermination of the more educated 'modernist' Poles- most being nominally Catholic. Least acknowledged is how the elimination of eastern Germany and the mass expulsions were a major anti Protestant eastern European demographic shift- even the major works on the expulsions of the Germans from eastern Europe tend to over look the religious demographics shift.

Moscovite Eastern Orthodoxy gets its way in having its areas cleared of Jews, Protestants and Roman Catholics with an apparent quid pro quo of not objecting to Roman Catholic Croatia's massacres of Orthodox Serbs to the west of the 1054 Great Schism Line (otherwise named the Amber Path line by the Avles Beluskes blogs), while getting a likewise 'cleansing' of Polish Roman Catholics to that line's east.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2014/06/quid-pro-quo-croatia-and-russia-ussr.html

The 1914-1945 World War 1 & 2 political manipulation of Europe would fit within a larger religious-ego-political scheme, extending from the initial split of the Western & Eastern Roman Empire, to a 1596 creation of a 'Uniate' Church that would be Eastern Orthodox in ritual but openly subservient to the Papacy in Rome, to a projected future 'consecration' of Russia.

http://continuingcounterreformation.blogspot.com/2014/09/western-eastern-roman-empire-101.html

Continuing Counter Reformation

Thursday, June 8, 2017

10 Years of Continuing Counter Reformation

19th Century Jesuits "Fervently Ultramontane, Devoted To The Sacred Heart, Fierce Defenders Of Pope Pius IX And The 1870 Definition Of Papal Infallibility And SuspiciousOf Liberalism In All Its Varieties"

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Neo-Ultramontanism - Wiki Article

Neo-ultramontanism

Contents

Origins and history

Criticism of term

See also

External links

Ultramontanism - Wiki Article

Ultramontanism

Contents

History

Controversy

Position of other Apostolic Churches

See also

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

The Plausible Falling Out between Angelo Francois Mariani and the Vatican

Introduction

Wlodimir Ledochowski, S.J.

Wlodimir Ledochowski's WW2 Kulturkampf Revenge

Vatican Masonic Order

Blog Archive

Continuing Counter Reformation- About Other Aspects

Blog Roll- note that I don't endorse crypto romanism

Assorted Otherwise Blogs

Topic Labels

Important Persons

Links

Open Discussion

About Me

Counter

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Feed

World Map

Followers

Feedjit

Feedjit