Vatican II — The Fruit of a Conspiracy Against Christ and His Church

Introduction

The theory of a conspiracy against the Church of Christ is not a modern so-called “conspiracy theory” but is divinely revealed in the Gospel of John:

… the Jews had already agreed among themselves that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.¹

This theory of a post-biblical Jewish conspiracy against Christianity is also found in many other passages of Sacred Scripture. In the Acts of the Apostles we read:

And when day was come, some of the Jews gathered together and bound themselves under a curse, saying that they would neither eat nor drink till they killed Paul. And they were more than forty men that had made this conspiracy.²

In the four Gospels, one repeatedly reads about the conspiracy orchestrated by Pharisaic and rabbinic Judaism against Jesus:

And the Pharisees going out made a consultation against him, how they might destroy him.³

Then were gathered together the chief priests and ancients of the people, into the court of the high priest, who was called Caiphas: And they consulted together that by subtilty they might apprehend Jesus and put him to death.⁴

And the Pharisees going out, immediately made a consultation with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.⁵

..and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might by some wile lay hold on him and kill him.⁶

And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might put Jesus to death..⁷

Therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus… therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him…⁸

From that day therefore they devised to put him to death.⁹

Even in the Acts of the Apostles we often read of the plot to kill St Paul:

And when many days were passed, the Jews consulted together to kill him.¹⁰

But the Jews stirred up religious and honourable women and the chief men of the city: and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas…¹¹

Where, when he had spent three months, the Jews laid wait for him, as he was about to sail into Syria…¹²

And the chief priests and principal men of the Jews went unto him against Paul… laying wait to kill him in the way.¹³

The “Fifth Column”

The anti-Church does not seek to place all its followers in openly heterodox ranks; on the contrary, it has always aimed to position a large number of its agents within the Catholic Church itself, with the goal of undermining it from within.

This kind of “fifth column,” infiltrated into the Church, sought to advance the cause of its adversaries—those who had openly separated from her and attacked her from the outside—by working from within.

Its mission was to infiltrate key positions, especially episcopal sees. In this way, heresy sought to penetrate as deeply as possible into the very core of the Church so that, one day, with the complicity of men within the Church, it could teach pastorally the very errors that the Church had dogmatically condemned.

This infiltration of a “masked fifth column” within Catholic ranks, starting from Jansenism¹⁴ (17th century), reached its peak in the modernist crisis (first half of the 20th century) and neo-modernism (second half of the 20th century).

St. Pius X, in the encyclical Pascendi (8 September 1907)—later reiterated by Pius XII in Humani Generis (12 August 1950)—explained that, unlike other heretics, the modernist did not seek to leave the Church but to remain within it in order to change it from within.

This intent is vividly illustrated in Antonio Fogazzaro’s novel Il Santo (which was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books for its modernist tendencies). The book details the modernist goal of establishing a secret society within the Church, seizing key positions in the hierarchy, and transforming the Church into a kind of philanthropic organization. In fact, St. Pius X explicitly condemned Modernism as a “secret sect” (foedus clandestinum) in his Motu Proprio Sacrorum Antistitum (1 September 1910).

The dream—or rather, the scheme—outlined by Fogazzaro, despite the condemnations of Pius X and Pius XII, was unfortunately realized through the modernist and neo-modernist conspiracy during the Second Vatican Council. This Council became a true “fifth column” within the Roman Church, followed by a false restoration under John Paul II and, above all, Pope Benedict XVI, who sought to reframe and secure acceptance of the Council in the light of Tradition.

The “Conspiracy Against the Church”

With the Second Vatican Council, the most perverse conspiracy against the Holy Church was carried out. In fact, certain anti-Christian forces had within the Church’s hierarchy a true “fifth column”—agents controlled by Freemasonry, B’nai B’rith, Communism, and the hidden power that governs them.

These agents were found among those Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops who formed a kind of progressive wing within the Council.¹⁵

The Church’s Legitimate Defence Against the “Anti-Christian Conspiracy”

One of the favourite weapons of the conspiracy led by the number one enemy of Christianity—post-biblical Judaism—was undoubtedly the infiltration of false converts, the so-called marranos, into the Church in order to subjugate it—if that were ever possible—to the Synagogue.

The entire Christian world faced a mortal threat unless it reacted decisively against this secret and deadly infiltration.

The “fifth column” infiltrated the Catholic clergy

One of the reasons for the temporary victory of the conspiracy of subversion and the anti-Church over the forces of good is that these forces fight only against the tentacles of the octopus, rather than against its head. By tentacles, I mean Communism and Freemasonry; by head, anti-Christian Judaism and the esoteric occultism of Kabbalistic origin.

It is astonishing how the fifth column managed to infiltrate the Church under John XXIII. Consider figures such as de Lubac, Congar, and Küng—who had been condemned by Pius XII in the 1950s, yet were summoned by Roncalli as early as 1959–1960 to serve as periti (experts) at the Council.

This infiltration succeeded in seizing firm control of the Council, steering it according to its own agenda. It led to the pastoral—though not dogmatic—proclamation of pantheism, the worship of man, the transcendent unity of all religions, and the supposed right of error to liberty.

Who Composes This So-Called “Fifth Column”?

Pinay answers:

It is also composed of the descendants of Jews who converted to Christianity over the centuries but practised the religion of Christ only outwardly.¹⁶

That is, in their hearts, these false converts secretly maintained their Talmudic faith and continued to celebrate their rites, organizing themselves into clandestine synagogues and ultra-secret lodges that operated covertly throughout the centuries.¹⁷

In this regard, it is particularly revealing to examine the directives issued by the Supreme Council of the Diaspora in Jerusalem to the Jews of Arles in 1489:

Dearest brothers in Moses, you tell us that the King of France wants you to become Christians; do so, but always keep the Mosaic Law in your hearts (by “Mosaic,” understand “Talmudic,"—editor’s note). Ensure that your children become clerics and canons, for in this way, they will bring ruin upon the Church.¹⁸

It is evident, therefore, that one of the greatest efforts of the anti-Church has been to introduce false converts into seminaries so that, upon becoming priests, they could climb the ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.¹⁹ Ideally, they would even ascend to the papal throne itself—just as the famous Carbonari leader known as Nubius had hoped. This would allow the Revolution to be carried out by Catholics themselves, who would be left stunned, disoriented, anguished, and powerless—as, in fact, occurred with Vatican II.

The Supreme Attack: A Pope According to the Needs of Judeo-Masonry

In 1824, Nubius—the head of the “Supreme Vendita”—wrote:

We must proceed gradually, by small means, toward the triumph of the revolutionary idea through a Pope.

What the sect desired was not a Freemasonic Pope. So what did it want? The Instructions make it clear: “A Pope according to our needs.”²⁰

What exactly does the expression “a Pope according to our needs” mean? It is simple: a Pope who is not officially a member of Freemasonry, yet one who belongs to the sect by virtue of the ideas he holds intellectually and has absorbed all by himself—namely: pantheism, naturalism, rationalism, liberalism, pluralism, tolerance as a principle, non-exclusivism, and the worship of man. In short, the entire complex of ideas derived from the public or hidden philosophy of Freemasonry.

Such a Pope would not belong to the body of Freemasonry by formal membership, but through initiation, he would be part of its soul. Indeed, just as in the Church of Christ a distinction is made between the body and the soul—where one can belong to the body without being part of the soul, and vice versa—so it is with Freemasonry. The body consists of the lodges, to which those who are officially registered belong, while the soul resides in doctrinal initiation, in ideas, in liberalism, and in tolerance. All who profess these principles belong to the soul of the sect.

Such a Pope would ensure that the clergy marches under the Masonic banner, believing themselves to be marching under that of the Vicar of Christ. In this way, the sect would see its dream fulfilled: carrying out the Revolution “in cope and tiara.”²¹

The Origins of the “Fifth Column” and Its Action

Judaism, which—after the deicide (33 A.D.), the destruction of Jerusalem (70 A.D.), and the dispersion (135 A.D.)—had to transform itself into a kind of “secret sect,” is therefore almost as old as Christianity itself.

The Jew, once he has managed to infiltrate the stronghold of his enemy, works tirelessly, obeying the orders of Jewish organizations that seek to achieve control from within over the people they wish to conquer.²²

Talmudic Judaism will therefore attempt, by every means, to exercise control over enemy religious organizations in order to dismantle them from within. Once it secures ecclesiastical positions, it uses them to further its plans for universal domination, as is happening today before our very eyes under the name of the New World Order.

Saint Paul himself found it necessary to warn the bishops that among them would arise fierce wolves who would not spare Christ’s flock, and that even from among the bishops, men would emerge who would speak perverse things to win followers for themselves.

Our Lord Jesus Christ, in the Gospel, warns us against “ravenous wolves in sheep’s clothing”, against “hirelings” and “bad shepherds”, admonishing us to be vigilant and always on guard against the “internal danger”. He warns us: “It is necessary that scandals come.”

Unfortunately, with the Second Vatican Council, wolves in sheep’s clothing were allowed to enter the high clergy and to use its juridical authority to crush the defenders of the Church, both clerical and lay. One should not be surprised by this infiltration, which Christ has permitted and still tolerates within the Church.

The Gospel itself provides a classic example of this: Judas, one of the Twelve Apostles, who betrayed Christ for thirty pieces of silver. Did Jesus make a mistake in choosing Judas? No! Jesus wanted to give us an example and a warning. He wanted us to recognize that the greatest danger the Church faces is being sold out to the enemy for thirty pieces of silver by its own high-ranking prelates. Indeed, other “Judas figures” have arisen throughout the Church’s two-thousand-year history, and more will continue to arise.

The Church has always managed to overcome its greatest danger—the “fifth column”—thanks to a virtuous and combative clergy and a laity faithfully subject to it. Unfortunately, with the Second Vatican Council, the agents of the anti-church—whom St. John calls the “Synagogue of Satan”²³—have seized positions of power and carried out a revolution that has thrown both the clergy and Catholic laity into disarray.

It is therefore our duty to fight—with God’s help—against the destructive action of this “fifth column”, which has now invaded the Church of Christ. This has been allowed as part of a mysterious design of the Redeemer, who, just as He willed that during His Passion His Humanity should suffer terribly while His Divinity remained completely hidden and eclipsed, has now—after two thousand years—permitted His Mystical Body to undergo a similar and terrible Passion. In this Passion, its divine element is obscured, and only its human aspect remains visible—completely battered, almost unrecognizable, and appearing in its least glorious form.

How False Christians Seek to Infiltrate the Church

In the Church of Christ—as St. Paul teaches—“there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, but all are one in Christ Jesus.”²⁴ At the same time, however, the Church remains vigilant to ensure that false converts do not infiltrate its ranks.

Every prohibition from holding ecclesiastical offices has always been established by the Church for strictly religious reasons—never racial or genetic ones. Even the Jewish historian Paul Johnson acknowledges this:

In 15th-century Spain, a Jew could not be persecuted simply for being born Jewish or because his parents were Jewish; it had to be proven that, despite being baptized, he still practised Judaism in some secret form.²⁵

Jewish-Christian Friendships

Today, one of the most effective methods employed by Judaism to prevent Christian self-defense is the creation of fraternities known as “Jewish-Christian Friendships.” These organizations saw a great surge in activity and development during and after the Second Vatican Council, particularly in the preparatory work for Nostra Aetate (October 28, 1965). This process culminated in the embrace between John Paul II and Chief Rabbi Elio Toaff at the synagogue in Rome on 13 April 1986, where Pope Wojtyła delivered the famous speech referring to “the Jews as the elder brothers of Christians.” He later reinforced this idea on 31 December 1986, during the Te Deum sung at the Church of the Gesù, stating: “In the faith of Abraham.” This trajectory eventually led to the Vatican’s official recognition of the State of Israel in 1993—an act that, as admitted by L’Osservatore Romano (1 January 1994, p. 1), “is imbued with the spirit of Vatican II.”

Furthermore, Pope John XXIII welcomed the Italian Rotary Club on 20 April 1959, just six months after his election, and again on 20 March 1963. Paul VI continued this trend, receiving them on 28 September 1963—three months after his election—as well as on 20 March 1965, and 4 November 1970. John Paul II followed suit on 14 June 1979, and 14 February 1984.

Even more significantly, Paul VI officially received the Jewish Masonic lodge B’nai B’rith on 3 June 1971 (L’Osservatore Romano, 3 June 1971), and John Paul II did the same in 1984 (Documentation Catholique, n. 1874, p. 509). The number of times B’nai B’rith has been received by Benedict XVI and Pope Francis is beyond count.

On 25 May 1928, the Holy Office issued a document condemning the Association of the Friends of Israel, which was reported and published by La Civiltà Cattolica:

Founded with excellent intentions and a sincere apostolic purpose, the society “Friends of Israel” unfortunately drifted—almost imperceptibly—from its original intent into several exaggerations and deviations. The idea of establishing a special institution for the difficult conversion of the Jews, under the partial title “Friends of Israel,” raised some concerns and uncertainties, which led us to exercise rightful caution. However, the explicit and public support of not a few bishops and cardinals should have been sufficient to dispel any fears.²⁶

La Civiltà Cattolica further comments:

The Jewish peril threatens the entire world through its pernicious infiltrations and harmful interference, particularly among Christian nations and, even more so, among Catholics and Latins. The blindness of this age-old liberalism has especially favoured the Jews while persecuting religious orders and Catholics above all. It is they (the Freemasons) who, in alliance with the descendants of Judah, have prepared the religious persecution and the anti-Christian struggle against Catholics and the clergy—an effort that has been the grim undercurrent of the entire liberal and Masonic movement.²⁷

Conclusion

Pinay wrote shortly before the opening of the Second Vatican Council:

It cannot be ruled out that Jewish agents, having infiltrated the hierarchy of the Church, will present to the Council a proposal for an agreement through which they hope to secure an aura of sympathy and understanding for themselves.²⁸

Unfortunately, this is precisely what happened with the pastoral and non-infallible declaration Nostra Aetate (28 October 1965), which was later used as a rallying point by John Paul II throughout his long pontificate from 1979 to 2005.

Now, we know that because it is divine, the Church cannot contradict itself dogmatically. However, its members—even its highest-ranking ones (the bishops)—since they are human, can contradict Christ’s teaching on a pastoral level (as Judas did). We have watched in dismay as the plan conceived by modernists unfolded during Vatican II and the pontificate of John Paul II. Nevertheless, it was with John XXIII and Paul VI that this revolution within the Church began—at times in subtle and hidden ways.

One wonders how Paul VI succeeded where all the enemies of the Church had failed. The explanation is simple: the latter attacked the Church from the outside, whereas with Montini, it was gradually corroded from within. But how is it that, in the face of such a result (“the auto-demolition of the Church,” as Paul VI himself called it), our eyes were not opened? Here too, the explanation is simple: the ingenious double game of Paul VI blinded everyone.

For example, Paul VI went to the UN to profess his faith in the Charter of Human Rights and then professed his faith in God according to the Catholic Creed. Some claim that Paul VI did not govern the Church, but was instead directed by a mafia of bad advisors who surrounded him. This is false. He governed with a firm hand—when it comes to breaking with Tradition, even while defending it in words. No pope before him had the audacity to suppress the Holy Office. No pope had imposed a reform of the Conclave with such force, excluding all cardinals over the age of eighty! No pope had ever displayed such extraordinary boldness in imposing a revolutionary “Mass.”

“Why,” we ask ourselves, “does the same Pope who issues energetic Motu Proprios when it comes to destroying Tradition loses his authority when it comes to condemning heresies?” Never a single measure to defend the Church against those who attack her. The progressive or modernist plan had been carefully prepared long beforehand.

In short, we are faced with a literally demonic plan of worldwide subversion in the deepest sense of the term. This plan, Paul VI carried out to the letter, down to the smallest details, strictly adhering to the modernist agenda outlined by St. Pius X in Pascendi. He implemented it at an accelerated pace, leaving us irreversibly confronted with a fait accompli before any resistance could be organized. The Second Vatican Council marks the transition point from Tradition to Modernism. With Vatican II, we have moved from a traditional Christian religion to a pseudo-humanitarian religion filled with Masonic concepts.²⁹