THE RELIGION OF ANTICHRIST (No. 30)

In many papers and "Letters" these past seven years, I have assembled some doctrine and opinions against the Vatican II "ecumenical" Council.  In this Letter I try to condense the argument I have carried on, by focusing on the religion of The Antichrist.  For, as it seems to me, just as we can, for all its richness and external diversity, reduce the Catholic religion to its basics of Church and Creed, the Way, the Truth, and the Life, so too can we reduce the seeming diversity of Evil to its Satanic components of counter-Church and deceit, particularly as it has shown itself since the opening of Vatican II.

   Error versus Truth -- with, of course, Error attempting always to put on the mask of Truth, and generally succeeding in doing so.

   Heresies multiply like bad weeds.  Yet there is nothing new of their kind under the sun.  What we do find are new circumstances of time and place, new combinations of error and malice, new emphases on one or more of the older heresies.  And a time is foretold when nearly all men will abandon God Who is all Truth and become spiritually blind, following one whom St. John called The Antichrist.  What kind of man will this Antichrist be?  What disorderly passion of social and economic tyranny, what false doctrine or religion will motivate him?  A good starting point for those who want the truth of the matter is not the hundred of books by modern writers purporting to interpret the Apocalypse of St. John, but St. Thomas Aquinas on the signs that will precede the final judgment.  I have quoted St. Thomas on this in other writings of mine.  Here in part is what he has to say about The Antichrist:

Antichrist is said to be head of all the wicked not by a likeness of influence, but by a likeness of perfection.  For in him the devil, as it were, brings his wickedness to a head, in the same way that anyone is said to bring his purpose to a head when he executes it.

   I call attention to "likeness of influence".  St. Thomas evidently does not reason to a military world conqueror.  In another passage St. Thomas writes that "in the head are found three things, order perfection, and the power of influencing," and that Antichrist "will pervert some in his day by exterior persuasion," none of which argues for a physically active tyrant.  St. Thomas writes further that Antichrist "is head of all the wicked by reason of the perfection of his wickedness."  Quite certainly St. Thomas derives this opinion at least in part from St. John's numerical symbol of the Antichrist, 666, the number of "perfect imperfection".

   In his Eschatology of The Catholic Doctrine of the Last Things, A Dogmatic Treatise, by Msgr. Joseph Pohle, Ph.D., D.D., published by Herder book Co., 1918, page 109, there appears this sentence:

THE GREAT APOSTASY AND ANTICHRIST. -- The "great apostasy", i.e., a tremendous defection among the faithful, is described partly as the cause and partly as an effect of the appearance of Antichrist.

   These words, no more than do those of St. Thomas, indicate a physically violent Antichrist, the military tyrant usually imagined by nearly all who have written in late years on The Antichrist.  There is this further argument in the words of St. Paul against an outwardly savage Antichrist:

Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders.  And in all seduction in iniquity to them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.  Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying, that all might be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.  (2 Thess. 9, 10, 11)

   As we see from this, St. Paul speaks not of violence but of seduction.  He predicts the mode of operation of Antichrist, "an operation of error", which is "the working of Satan," and of "lying wonders".  Since the devil is the "father of lies, a liar by his very nature", it follows that his creature, that man who will in time put himself wholly at Satan's disposal, must of necessity employ Satan's own methods of deceit rather than physical force.

   Antichrist will come at a time of general weakening of faith among the Church's members, in an age inclined toward paganism, to all of which he will bring his special diabolical influence, and thus the words of Msgr. Pohle, quoted above, "a tremendous defection among the faithful, partly as cause and partly as an effect of the appearance of Antichrist".  Msgr. Pohle writes:

St Paul predicted a spiritual blindness among the faithful.  There is no mention of distinct heresies in St. Paul's predictions.  So we need not conclude to a general deliberate following of the Antichrist, who will of course appear as an angel of light.  In the words of Fr. Coleridge, S.J., in his book The Return of the King, "he will come unto his own, and his own will receive him".

   St. Paul writes of the coming of the Son of Perdition and the Great Apostasy as of one piece.  The apostasy is mainly that of Catholics who think themselves following Christ but who are not because of their spiritual blindness.  They are instead following Antichrist.  As St. Paul foretells it, they are those who have not sufficient love for the truth, but believe error.  What errors would they believe?  Surely, those which will be taught as by an 'angel of light' in the name of an updated religion, which religion Pope St. Pius X called Modernism which he said would bring on a universal apostasy.

   Apostasy does not come from physical force, although many weak in the faith may from fear of torture or death deny Christ.  Since only one great apostasy is foretold, the words of Holy Scripture are made confusing if we look for a great apostasy and one yet greater.  There can be only one great apostasy, only one Antichrist in the Scriptural sense, St. Paul's Man of Sin.

   What kind of man, then, will this Antichrist be?  What office or position of influence will he occupy so as to be able to persuade a majority of the faithful?  St. Paul writes that a revolt must come first, before the Man of Sin can be revealed.  A revolt came with Vatican II which a "progressivist" priest, Fr. Yves Congar, a leading Vatican II theologian, approvingly called "the October revolution".  This revolution is well documented in a book called The Rhine Flows Into The Tiber, by Fr. Ralph M. Wiltgen, a careful and objective reporter.

   The revolt of the Vatican II bishops against Catholic Tradition, what they have since called their ongoing religion, has resulted in changing all forms of the Sacraments, the rite of the Mass itself, all disciplines, and canon law.  ("Who sits in the holy place, changing all laws.")  And nearly all the reverend clergy and the laity have joined in the revolt.

   I have repeatedly quoted words of revolt of the head man, such as those he spoke on 29 June 1970 from the Vatican palace:

The rapport of the faithful with Christ has in Peter its minister, its interpreter, its guarantor.  All must obey him (the Pope) in whatever he orders, if they wish to be associated with him in the new economy of the Gospel.

   Later he would speak to the Cardinals of his "new style of government".

   The whole method of revolt are in these words.  Montini first associates himself with Peter, then he insists, as though it follows without qualification, that we must obey him "in whatever he orders", even though this be an impossible "new economy of the Gospel" or a "new style of government."  By such lies is Catholic obedience obtained for the support of revolution.

   "He will enthrone himself in the temple of God".  St. Jerome writes in reference to St. Paul's words about the temple of God, that they mean "either in Jerusalem as some think, or in the Church, which seems to me most likely."  St. John Chrysostom, "Not in the temple of Jerusalem, but in the temple of the Church", that is, in our time, the Vatican.

   This new economy of the gospel is imposed in "the Spirit of Vatican II" which, it has been constantly asserted, is "a new Pentecost".

   Truth about the certain assistance of the Holy Ghost has been turned into the Vatican II big lie.  It is done by those who say that because a true pope does have this guarantee of divine assistance, Paul VI could not be encouraging false doctrine.  In other words, heresy and apostasy cannot be heresy and apostasy when encouraged by the man in the papal chair.  But in defining the truth about papal infallibility the First Vatican Council rejected the opinion of those who said that the Pope must be declared infallible in all his official pronouncements.  While speaking mostly truth a false pope can give every kind of aid to destructive measures.  It is a sin against the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, to deny the self-evident truth about pope Montini and the evil fruits of his pontificate.

   It does not follow that gray is white, or that three times seven is seventeen, or some other number than twenty-one, because the Pope says so.  Catholic doctrine is at least as immutable as mathematics, and while it has become better understood and defined over the Christian centuries, never can we have a "new economy of the Gospel, a new Pentecost".  When some men start telling us that they have a new interpretation given by the Holy Spirit, we can be sure they are lying.

   Time and again I have received objections to my attempts to expose this fraud, from people who say that the Pope is guaranteed guidance of the Holy Spirit, which truth I have just shown as having been expressed in a talk from the Vatican palace.  We find this clever use of Catholic doctrine, by slight twists, omissions, etc., in all the works of radical reform.  It is as old as Satan.  The devil does not deny Catholic truth but interprets it to his own purpose.  "Yes, yes," he says, "I am with you in this.  Let us make this gospel of love real.  Too long have we been hampered by the old methods."  He gives us a "higher" or "inner knowledge"), that of intuition, of the Holy Spirit.  This "inner vision" and appeal to the Spirit is found in Gnostic writings, including those of Theosophist Bishop Leadbeater and in the pretensions of Vatican II.  It finds its popular expression in the pentecostal insanity, led by Cardinal Suenens, Pope Paul's "great souled churchman", who, amazingly, joined Paul VI when he gave his first blessing as pope from the Vatican palace.

   It is Catholic doctrine that a true pope could not go far astray -- that at the least he will not teach error ex cathedra, as we say -- because the papal office is guaranteed the guidance of the Holy Spirit to those who do not deliberately reject this guidance.  It is also Catholic truth that all men have free will, and that like Judas all can betray Christ.  The greatest of these rejections and betrayals will of course be that by the one Holy Scripture speaks of as The Antichrist.

   Right from the start, when Pope John XXIII announced his "Inspiration" to call a Council, Catholics have been directed by an "Inner vision" or Spirit of Vatican II.  This by an arrogant claim of the reformers to an enlightenment which transcends the teachings of the popes and other doctors of the Church prior to Vatican II.  This pretension is simply that of the old Gnosticism, the devil's own thing by which he plays the ape of God.  It is certain that from the Gnostics comes the Antichrist.

   In A Catholic Dictionary, 1884, the writer on Gnosticism tells his readers that

Gnosticism means no more than 'knowledge', but even in the Epistles of St. Paul (1 Cor, xii, 8 xiv. 6) it begins to acquire a technical significance, and implies a peculiar insight into the depths of Christian doctrine.

   We find this element in the Vatican II reformers' constant appeal to "the experts", rather than to defined dogma.

   Donald Atwater's Catholic Dictionary contains information that "the Gnostics were pre-Christian in origin, and had come into contact with the religions of Egypt and India as well as with Judaism."  This relationship helps to explain the "Hinduism in the Seminaries" a priest recently wrote about in National Catholic Register.  I am sure it was this kind of thing which impelled a popular monk-writer to go to Asia, to study Asiatic monasticism, where he was electrocuted by accident.  Gnosticism or Modernism are of the same package, what Pope Pius X called a "synthesis of all heresies."

   As I've mentioned several times in my writings, the Gnostic "ecumenical" program of Vatican II can be found in detail in the writings, before 1920, of Theosophist Liberal Old Roman Catholic Church, which I shall refer to at least once more in this Letter.  Here I only quote a few lines from the Bishops Leadbeater and Wedgewood, from Peter Anson's Bishops at Large:

A Church that is Catholic, must include all sects, creeds, and religions.  It should be a universal brotherhood, for the link joining all men is Divine Love.  "Religion is life", not a creed.  The eternal principles were laid down by our Lord of Nazareth, and the other great World Teachers.

   Notice the persistence of Gnosticism, which the dictionary writer tells us was known in the early centuries of the Church, and even before that time -- that "it had come into contact with the religions of Egypt and India as well as with Judaism", and which is clearly discernible in the twentieth century occultist writings and in the program of Vatican II.  This persistence shows it to be Satan's own special religion, using "religion" in the sense given in a dictionary at hand: "belief in a divine or superhuman power or powers to be obeyed or worshipped as the creator(s) or ruler(s) of the universe."  As Satan's own, it will of course be the religion of The Antichrist.

PROTESTANTISM AND GNOSTICISM

What of Protestantism?  This question came to mind as I wrote the last part of the sentence ending in "synthesis of all heresies".  I thought of an article I had read in the 1870 Catholic World, a commentary on a paper written by one Abbe Martin, Paris, 1869, a paragraph from which follows:

Protestantism differs essentially from all the heresies that have previously rent the Church.  It is not a particular heresy, nor a union of heresies; it is simply a frame for the reception of errors...  It is a circle capable of indefinite extension, of being enlarged as occasion requires, so as to include any and every error within its circumference.  A new error arises on the horizon, the circle extends further and takes it in.  Its power of extension is limited only by its last denial, and is therefore practically unlimited.  What it asserted in the beginning it was able to deny a century later; what it maintained a century ago it can reject now; and what it holds today it may discard tomorrow.  It may deny indefinitely, and still be Protestantism.  It can modify, metamorphose, turn and return itself without losing any thing of its identity.  Grub, caterpillar, chrysalis, butterfly, it is transformed, but does not die.

   So wrote this French priest, Abbe Martin, in Paris, 1869.  He would perhaps be amused to read the sign I saw last Sunday on a nearby Protestant church, one of two in the same town with a six-point intertwined triangle star in the main window.  The sign, "NOT RELIGIOUS.  YET CHRISTIAN".  Someone delving into the matter in England lately has turned up the number of 7,000 Protestant sects.  That is perhaps a bit too neat, yet we know how these divisions inevitably increase, what little of belief is required for membership.

   What follows is from the commentary on Abbe Martin's paper, just quoted, an article by an American priest, a convert from Protestantism.

All this is very true.  Protestantism undoubtedly differs essentially from all the particular heresies of former times, such as the Arian, Macedonian, Nestorian, Eutychian, Pelagian, etc.; but we think it bears many marks of affinity with ancient Gnosticism, of which it is perhaps the historical continuation and development.  Gnosticism was not a particular or special heresy, denying a particular article, dogma, or proposition of faith.  The Gnostics held themselves to be the enlightened Christians of their times.  ...they looked down with contempt on Catholics remaining in the outer court, knowing nothing of the Spirit.

   Each of the Protestant 'reformers', leaders of the many and various sects, claimed that his own special insight, his reading of Scripture, where he departed from Catholic teaching, and from the other Protestants, was of divine inspiration.  In other words, these men claimed to be "the enlightened Christians of their times", as our priest-writer in The Catholic World put it, which claim he identified as that of the Gnostics.  Certainly the Gnostic name must be applied to the leaders of secret societies, such as Freemasonry, who pretend to a higher, esoteric knowledge and a "broader, more encompassing faith", as we find it expressed in Mr. Robert Welch's JBS Bluebook.  Gnostics certainly are those who claim the special enlightenment they call "the Spirit of Vatican II".  We hear less about this today, as the fruits of Vatican II are shown to be rotten.  Nevertheless the counter-Church of Paul 6 continues to make its appeal to Vatican II as its doctrinal source and inspiration, rejecting the popes.  In this Vatican II is at one with the Protestant "reformers", which oneness is openly shown in every way possible, including the common "liturgy for all Faiths" proposed at the First Session of Vatican II, which became reality in Pope Paul's Novus Ordo, the "new mass" now generally called the "Eucharist" or "Assembly".

   More on Protestantism from our priest-writer in The Catholic World.  I do not have his name; editors seem not to have published the names of their contributors those days.

The real character of contemporary Protestantism, we apprehend, is to be sought in the ascendancy acquired in the fifteenth century, and which has invaded Catholic nations hardly less successfully than Protestant nations.  Protestantism is the child of this ascendancy, and its legitimate tendency to place the world above heaven, the supremacy of the secular over the spiritual. ... This spirit was not originated by the Reformation.  It has preceded it, it had caused the carnal Jews to misinterpret the prophecies and to expect in the promised Messiah a temporal prince instead of a spiritual redeemer and regenerator.  It had even entered the garden and induced the fall of our first parents.  It has always subsisted in the world; it is what St. Augustine called the City of the World as opposed to the City of God.  It is the purely secular spirit emancipated from the spiritual, and substituting itself for it.

   The spirit and program of Vatican II and Paul 6 is contained in those sentences.  The Vatican II opening to the world, the secular spirit substituting itself for the spiritual, which achieves ultimate and spectacular fulfillment in Paul 6, abjectly surrendering to the powers of this world at the United Nations.  You hadn't thought of it that way?  Read more carefully what the bishops have been saying, in line with what they are doing.  Real Maryknoll and other so-called Catholic magazines, especially those of orders which were once mainly engaged in missionary work.  Actually, most any so-called Catholic publication you might pick up contains evidence of the secular spirit and latter days Gnosticism.

   Incidentally, if I write of heresy and apostasy, of Gnosticism and of Gnostics, I certainly do not mean to apply in this modern age of confusion about religion, such terms to individual Protestants or Catholics.  I am not fudging any Catholic whose words and works do not show outwardly his full acceptance and promotion of the new religion.  Many are disturbed and do not know where to turn.  So it has been these past eighteen years or so with Catholics; centuries for the western world in general.  However, I would suggest to those Catholics who, ignoring doctrine and evidence, thoughtlessly defend Paul VI, that they consider the case of the Jew Pierleone, who, as Anacletus II, occupied the Chair of Peter for eight years, yet whose name does not appear in the list of popes, but as an Antipope.

PAUL 6 - VATICAN II GNOSTICISM

The old Catholic Encyclopedia affirms the eastern origin of Gnosticism.  What most clearly ties in Gnosticism with Vatican II is the assurance from the learned writer, Matter, that "Gnosticism in its purest forms strove to give Christianity the widest possible meaning, by linking it with the oldest religious doctrines."  Hence the "return to sources" of the Vatican II reformers, which return contradicts their updating, their progressivism.  Of even greater significance is this historian's assurance in connection with the Gnosis, that "the belief in the divinity has revealed itself in the religious institutions of all nations, which leads to a kind of universal religion, which contains the basic material of all."  This, of course, is straight Vatican II "ecumenism".  Pope Pius X in his Pascendi shows this to be one of the doctrines of the Modernists, in the following passage:

It is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that other doctrine of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held true ... in the conflict between different religions, the most that the Modernists maintain is that the Catholic religion has more of truth because it is more living.

   Paul 6 expresses the Gnostic belief in his appeal to Peking for a "dialogue", on the basis that the thoughts of Chairman Mao Tse-Tung "also contain Christian values".  (N.Y. Times, 18 April 1973.)

   A painting of Mao was hung, next to one of Paul 6, in the Vatican press office.  (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 24 Dec 1969).  On another occasion Paul 6 makes the remark that "today we are all Christians".  (I have the reference to this from The Wanderer; the editor did not comment.)  On another occasion he speaks of a Church which "weeks to come into new contact with a world which has appropriated to itself the principles of Christianity". (Dialogues, by Msgr. Clancy).  In all this and much more since Vatican II we see this Gnosticism which "sought to give the widest possible meaning to Christianity".  That the chief Traditionalist leader of the past few years, one who has his own priests, seminaries, and sacramental system, has begged for a place in this Gnostic counter-Church, also confirms "the widest possible meaning" the Gnostics give to Christianity, or rather the Catholic Faith.  Not in all the years since the Vatican II Gnostic Council has this traditionalist leader ever forthrightly denounced the complete refusal of Paul 6 to govern as pope.  On the contrary he has time and again affirmed his loyalty to him.  More on this later.

   With regard to this "widest possible meaning" again, I quote from the Vatican II Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World.

2. Hence this Second Vatican Council, having probed more profoundly into the mystery of the Church, now addresses itself without hesitation, not only to the sons of the Church and to all who invoke the name of Christ, but to the whole of humanity. 

   Why only the "Church in the modern world"?  This presumably follows from "having probed more profoundly into the mystery of the Church", definitely a Gnostic presumption, coming as it does in these late centuries, after Catholic doctrine has been defined.  And of course it is a double lie that the Catholic Church did not address Itself to the whole of humanity from the beginning.  It is a double lie because these same men announced an end to conversions a few years ago.  This was in line with that "widest possible meaning" which counts all men already in, and for which reason they changed the words of Christ Himself in the Mass to "for all men".  Not of course that Christ did not die for and does not desire the salvation of all men, but not all will be saved.  Mass is offered for the Church's members.

   Most disturbing is the way in which all the writings of Vatican II are acted upon.  According to a leading French Progressive, "The Pope speaks for the right but acts for the left, and actions are what count".  So far had they already gone at the beginning of the Council, as to let out this bit of duplicity as a proper policy.  Anyway here in part is what was quoted from Fr. Michael C. Reilly, S.J. of the LeMoyne College religious studies department, in the Winter 1978 issue of the Northwest Jesuit, about the Jesuit Missionary spirit.

Yes, the Society and the Church have lost their old enthusiasm for the missions -- because the rules (perhaps even the ball game itself) have been changed. We are seeing the end of the mission era; we are in a transition period of doubt and trial / error...

The writer, also a priest, who quotes Fr. Reilly, continues:

There are deeper reasons behind the "change of spirit".  Fr. Reilly highlights two of them; the first, theological.  The feverish missionary activity over the past 100 years and more was basically motivated by the theological premise:  if pagans were not baptized and converted they would go to hell or at least, save their souls with great difficulty.  Since Vatican II's declaration that non-Christian religions can be vehicles of salvation, the steam has been taken out of the old motive.

   Well, there you have it, a denial of the Church's teaching concerning the urgency of baptism and conversion, a denial which expresses the Gnostic "widest possible meaning" on salvation.

   I don't remember ever having read anything more enthusiastically Marxist than a recent Maryknoll magazine issue in adoration of Martin Luther King.  A writer in Liguorian tells of Mayknoll Father Walsh of China-jail-fame, that he does not want to be with the old mission priests but in that decision-making position he occupies.  The January 1978 issue of Maryknoll contains an article titled "Why I am a missioner", by Fr. Joseph Towle, MM., who says this:

Many people have asked me why I decided to enter the seminary and become a missioner.  It is a question that I still ask myself.  How do I answer?  On most occasions I have replied in what must seem a facile manner:  "I feel God called me to be a missioner to people of another culture" ... Even after 22 years of experience in Mayknoll, I find it difficult to make an adequate reply.

   The adequate reply is not given.  The remainder of the article is devoted to Fr. Towle's personal experiences.  Heading this piece is a photo of two Maryknoll priests and a bishop, all three in rough clothes contemplating an old auto engine.  It might be objected that this kind of thing does not fit in with the Gnostic 'salvation through knowledge' that I have been writing about, but depicts a quite certain loss of salvation through emptiness.  Quite true.  Yet it is the Gnostics who are in the background of it all; and these priests, even as the common grubby little communist, think themselves in possession of a new, truer religion since Vatican II.  It certainly confirms what I have written in several other papers, that the modern attack by our enemies has been before all an assault on our intellects.

   Having lost the Catholic sense and intellect, the Faith itself, it is easy for such priests to follow the Gnostic pope from the contemplation of things divine to that of automobile engines, tractors, all the devices of modern technology as gods in themselves.  I quote here from a photo collection, "Dell, the story of the POP", mainly about Pius XII but with this about Archbishop Montini, page 54:

Since coming to the world's biggest Catholic diocese in 1954, the Archbishop has put in an almost unbroken string of 16-hour days.  He spent his first Sunday touring "Stalingrad", Milan's strongly communist industrial suburbs, and has since visited every factory in the area.  In crisp speeches free of cant or jargon Montini enunciated the terms of the reconciliation of Church and labor so forcefully that he has become known as "the Archbishop of the workers".  "It is up to the priest, not the people, to take the initiative," he says.  "It is useless for the priest to ring his bell.  No one listens.  What is necessary is that the priest be able to hear the factory sirens, to understand the temples of technology where the modern world lives and throbs."

   So now we have a pope who has had an inspiration about factory sirens.  Factories as they are in fleeting time and modern technology and its spirit, are for this pope absolutes.  With the beauty of Europe of the Christian centuries around him he dares to say that no one listens to the priest.  Montini seems never to have lacked that audacity in lying that can only come from the devil.  And how all the Jeers of Lombardy and the Milan communists must have listened to these "crisp" words of Montini "without cant or jargon", certainly without Catholic truth or inspiration.  Yes, Montini will care nothing for the priest as priest, or why would he have tolerated the Marxist Maryknolls and their kind these past fifteen years?  Montini will give every encouragement and example calculated to assist the priest who listens only to the factory sirens and contemplates old automobile engines.  At the beginning of his evil pontificate he will bring to that temple of atheists, the UN, his abject profession of faith in the factory whistle rather than the bells which formerly called men to Catholic worship.  In short, Montini worships the world, not God.  (And the devil took him up into a high building of the new World Order...)

   Why do I keep harping on pope Montini and his evil pontificate?  Because there is nothing that so much matters to the whole world than the fact of this pope opposed to the truth, beauty and order which once was Christendom.  Nothing now wrong can be set right while this man occupies the papal chair.  I knew from the beginning that only continued corruption and confusion could result during the time he might occupy the papal chair.  So it has been.  So it will continue to be.  All that nay layman can do is to warn those Catholics who are being taken in -- those who do not actually welcome the new religion.  The others are beyond help from the Saints themselves.

THE RELIGION OF ANTICHRIST

Of all the elements several learned writers -- those I have quoted in parts -- have seen in Gnosticism, I think we can take one as basic in our search for the religion of The Antichrist: "the doctrine of salvation by knowledge", with which definition the writer in the old Catholic Encyclopedia begins his article on that subject.  I am certain that the evil character of the Antichrist will be that of Lucifer whose intellectual pride, his presumed superior knowledge, led to the first terrible revolt, that of the heavenly spirits.  Lucifer in his pride presumed to a higher knowledge, possession of which would, according to Lucifer, deliver the angelic spirits from servitude to their Creator.  And he used the same approach to Mother Eve, promising that her eyes would be opened, that she and Adam would become as gods, if only they would listen to him and put aside God's simple command not to eat of the forbidden fruit.  Thus did Lucifer downgrade authority and tradition, as at Vatican II.

   And so it is with Antichrist.  He brings a 'higher knowledge' to the papal office, a "new style of government ...  a new economy of the gospel", superior to that of all the popes who preceded him.  Not for Montini the doctrines and laws handed down by those who in the past represented Christ.  He will change all things -- the disciplines, the Sacramental forms, the Mass: he will do away with the practice of condemning heresies and heretics, calling this practice tyranny, which he, Montini, is too generous and noble to carry on.  No, pope Montini will not act as did his unenlightened and ignoble predecessors.  In accordance with his new style of government Montini will institute a total change of doctrinal emphasis, setting aside as irrelevant all laws, divine and positive.  In his superior wisdom Montini will throw out the past and refer all things to his New Pentecost, his Vatican II, the articles of which he signed, and which revolutionary "pastoral council" he has carried out with lies added to lies, mostly by speaking Catholic orthodoxy in peculiar accents, while permitting and encouraging his reforms in "the Spirit of Vatican II".  Promulgating the Vatican II Declaration on Religion Liberty, Montini, in the words of the Abbe de Nantes' Libellum "gave bent to a glorification of Man-who-makes-himself-God which is without parallel in the history of the Church".

   I have elsewhere given other reasons why St. John's 666 of "perfect imperfection", St.Thomas' "perfection in evil", has to apply to a pope, one in the highest spiritual office, and no other.  See especially my Letters No. 4 and 9, or my booklet Last Days of the Catholic Church.

   It has been said lately that Montini seems now to be speaking only Catholic orthodoxy.  This was to be expected, for as his revolution comes more into the open, so that most Catholics who yet care are disturbed by it, the pretense of Catholic orthodoxy must be stepped up.  All the correct Catholic doctrine the man can manage to speak from now on will not change the course of evil he has set in motion -- and Montini knows this.  The bishops are his.  Yet it is not unlikely that after the Catholic decline in numbers since Vatican II, the new syncretist Antichrist church will increase in total membership.  The editor of National Catholic Register has recently interviewed the representative of a group of hippies who have come into the Church after years of searching.  It is not unreasonable to feel quite certain that these people do not have a correct understanding of the Catholic religion -- that if they did they would not accept it.  What they have discovered in the Montinian church is their own thing, which any number of the new clergy are living.

THE JEWS AND ANTICHRIST

What about the Jews whose doctrine of This World salvation I have so often mentioned as the evil influence behind Vatican II and the Great Apostasy?  As always, Jews are the managers, the prime movers.  Jewish messianism, lately taking form in Marxism and Zionism, never dies.  But for practical purposes at least, Judaism broadens out into something more encompassing which takes in many Gentiles.

   In the time of Christ the Jews were divided into two main parties, the Pharisees and the Sadducees.  The Sadducees were the Liberals of their day among the Jews.  Most or perhaps all of the Scribes were Sadducees.  It was they who favored and practiced a sort of Vatican II opening to the world -- the Roman world of secular power.  It was to this power they appealed in their move to kill Christ, threatening Pilate with loss of friendship with Caesar.  (In other words, they would have Pilate sacked.)  The Pharisees who held to a narrow Jewish position, scrupulously separating themselves from the Gentiles, nevertheless joined in this appeal to Caesar to put Christ to death.  Here certainly was an example of the self-righteous religious person who in the pride of his supposed superior knowledge makes a deal with Satan.  We see the thing repeated in the Jansenists who drifted into occultism, the last stage of Gnosticism.

   I wrote in an earlier paper that Paul 6 is of the Sadducees.  It is he who brings to a head the religious opening to the world of our time.  It is he who delivers Christ to that illegitimate world power, the United Nations.  Undoubtedly Paul 6 would be a friend of Caesar.  His whole program, starting with his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, proclaims this.  It is not the normal good relationship of Church to Christian governments that Montini would have, but an abdication of the spiritual power, its degradation and eventual death with the establishment of an all-powerful new World Order.

   With regard to the generality of the Jews today, a leading Jewish writer of some years ago, Herman Wouk, had this to say in the New York World-Tribune of 17. Nov. 1959.

The Talmud to this day is the circulating heart's blood of the Jewish religion.  Whatever law, customs or ceremonies we observe -- whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists -- we follow the Talmud.  It is our common law.

   The well known Rabbi Stephen Wise, now dead, said this:

The return from Babylon and the adoption of the Babylonian Talmud marked the end of Hebrewism and the beginning of Judaism.

   Thus Judaism is not true Hebrewism but something derived from the minds and imaginations and desires of certain individual Jews.  These Talmudic teachers do not completely reject the Old Testament but interpret it according to a presumed superior intuitive knowledge, which carries on the old Gnostic heresy of the Jews as eventual rulers of a kingdom of this world.  The school which Karl Marx attended taught that the Jewish race would be its own messiah.

   A book by Max Dimont, copyright 1971, is summed up in these words by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "The Jew in his proud and proper role as the bearer of culture and morality..."

   Always the Prince of This World has his party opposed to Christ's kingdom.  It will be the work of Antichrist to first usurp the spiritual power, then surrender it to the satanic powers of this world.  This Gnostic power appears in the presumption of the Scribes and Pharisees of a superior knowledge which led them to add 813 precepts to the Law as given by God to Moses, then to interpret that law in a carnal sense.  What has been passed down through the centuries from these men are the Babylonian Talmud and the Kabbala.  The latter is called in the old Catholic Encyclopedia "the system of esoteric theosophy which for many generations played an important part, chiefly among the Jews, after the beginning of the tenth century of our era."  You can find this "system of Jewish religious philosophy", as the writer in the Encyclopedia calls it, in a thick book on Masonic morals and dogma.  The same thing -- the Vatican II new religion -- appears in a recently printed leaflet at hand from a Theosophical Society.  Here in part is what it says:

The Theosophical Society is a world-wide organization ... composed of men and women who are united by their determination to promote brotherhood and remove religious, racial and other antagonisms. Their bond of union is a common search for Truth. They hold that Truth should be sought by study, by reflection, by service, and not imposed by authority as a dogma. They consider that belief should be the result of individual study, experience and insight rather than mere acceptance of traditional ideas, and that it should rest on knowledge, not on assertion. They see every religion as an expression of the Divine Wisdom and prefer its study to its condemnation, its practice to proselytism. Peace is their watchword, as Truth is their aim.

   In that statement you have all the elements of Vatican II, not of course so brashly set forth, it is the Gnostic thing, the ape of God -- brotherhood, peace, Truth, racial harmony, etc.  Peace, of course, has been the constant cry of Montini, as also his program of service to the world.  No condemnations of any kind either -- not from Montini; and the end of conversions, that is, "no proselytism".  The Montini.  Vatican II doctrine is that of the Gnostics of the Theosophical Society, in that both "see every religion as an expression of the Divine Wisdom."

   One thing in all that smoke of Theosophy that we may safely take exception to, is their claim to be in favor of individual study, experience and insight to determine religious truth.  The adepts", the rabbis, the real Gnostic directors of this satanic program will be working deftly to guide the individual searcher on his way to proper brotherhood and 'understanding'.  The search for the new truth will end as it has ended in Russia, China, Cuba, and in other Soviet areas.

THE PROGRAM OF ANTICHRIST

The Vatican II "opening to the world" means active cooperation with the Liberal-Marxist forces aiming at total control of all human activities.  This is shown in many ways, the first of which was the inviting of Soviet clergy to the Council on their terms, and, by the refusal of the council to condemn atheistic Communism.  It is shown by the cordial relations which have existed between Paul 6 and murderous Soviet leaders: before all by Montini's abject surrender at the UN -- his begging there that his humble services be accepted by the representatives of this atheistic and illegitimate body.

   As "Progressives" and evolutionists with a secular World State in view, these forces, carrying forward the messianic dreams of Judaism, are especially concerned to erase all that remains of Christian belief and instinct from the minds of youth; and so they have worked in the school systems -- from the 1950's in Catholic schools, as I mention elsewhere.  This year, 1978, the final push is on in the United States to take complete control by the State of all private and public schools.  They want the child at an early age.  The 'new truth' is in sex and horrible text books of 'social studies', in the new catechisms of Vatican II, doctored by the Jews, in nearly all magazines and newspapers, on television.  I quote here from the 5 June 1978 issue of The Spotlight, a national tabloid unusual in that it exposes some of these things.

On March 29, 1973, John and Vicky Singer withdrew their children from the South Elementary School (in Utah).  Like many concerned parents across the United States who have watched their children being taught principles foreign to their beliefs, the Singers objected to textbooks that undermined the family, the home, and God.

   The accompanying photos show a wholesome family, father, mother and seven children, in their own schoolroom.  What I find especially significant here, related to my subject, is this public school textbook sample of what the Singers object to:

   HUMANIST MANIFESTO

We reject these features of traditional religious morality that deny humans a full appreciation of their own potentialities and responsibilities.  Traditional religions often offer solace to humans, but, as often, they inhibit humans from helping themselves or experiencing their full potential.  Humans are responsible for what they are or will become.  No Deity will save us, we must save ourselves. (Humanist Manifesto II, 1973).

   The new religion is pervasive.  It creeps and sneaks where circumstances make this approach expedient.  In the meantime it prepares new gulags for those who refuse to fall in with the 'new truth'.  Orchestrating the betrayal of the Catholic Church into the modern Gnosticism, what Pope St. Pius X called Modernism, and thus opposing himself directly to Christ, in that unique and complete sense in which only a pope could do it, is the hypocrite Montini, the Antichrist.  Far from speaking out against the encroaching atheistic World State, Montini obviously supports the Marxist 'Call to Action' for bishops and missioners.  Everything fits in with what I wrote in my second paper, and which I have held to, that the Revolution in Church and world are one.

   This betrayal of the Papacy, of that spiritual power and divine mission Christ bestowed on the popes, affects not Catholics only but the whole world.  The moral and intellectual disorders multiply as a result of the Montini secularization.  Whatever feelings the Catholic Church might have aroused in those opposed to it, the Papacy has been central and necessary to the stability and moral order by which western men have lived.  It was certainly St. John's apocalyptic "loosing of Satan" which opened Vatican II, and which comes to a head in the time of pope Montini.  Had any great scholar thought in the Christian centuries about what kind of program The Antichrist must follow, surely he would have set down the following main parts:

1. He would have foreseen the Antichrist put himself and the papal office at the service of a new secularist World Order.  This would be an order of men, pagans, Jews, atheists, and apostate Catholics, who see themselves and their organization as the supreme directing force in all human affairs.
2. It would have been foreseen that Antichrist would announce a new interpretation of the Gospel, inverting Christ's "seek first the kingdom of God". Our old Christian scholar will have foreseen Antichrist announcing "a new economy of the gospel", and with it a New Order of Worship (Novus Ordo) in which all religions can join. 
   
3. It would have been foreseen that Antichrist will condemn no errors but proclaim new and higher truths in a new gospel of Love, derived from inspiration. And, 
   
4. Because he must follow Satan's own method, the only one that in any case would work, that of deceit, of saying mostly what is true and doing all that is false, Antichrist will often or usually speak Catholic orthodoxy. 
   

   I have said here that a learned and perceptive Christian scholar of past centuries, one who might have studied deeply what kind of program the Antichrist would impose, might have reasoned doctrinally to these four parts.  Actually there is reason to be quite certain that all this would have been beyond the powers of even the greatest.  Christ Himself had said of that time no man knows.  St. Augustine thought that only in the latter days, the time of the Antichrist, could he and his program be recognized.  Yet I think that if this program could have been presented to the great Catholic scholars in the four parts as I have set them down (having seen it with my own eyes), they would have agreed that it must be so, and that indeed it could not be carried out in any other way.

   But the average person after reading these papers, then seeing one of the thousands of photos of Paul 6, and reading his latest words to a group of pious pilgrims, will think incredible, after all, that this tired old man could be The Antichrist.  As the prophet Daniel foretold, "He will do more than could be believed."  These words of Daniel should be our guide; that is, we must realize that it is not so much what this Son of Perdition says, but in what he manages to do that is significant.  It is this which will enable us to see beyond ordinary outward appearances.  According to St. John the Antichrist is, after all, a man, not a monster.  It is only in the distracting wildly imaginative writings of those I have called apocalyptic fantasy writers, and in some occultist photos I have seen, that a strange, scarcely human kind of Antichrist is pictured.  This kind of thing comprises a devilish device for putting around doctrinal discussion of the subject an aura of insanity.  Say Antichrist and they think you are a bit odd, to say the least.

   So as not to be led astray or be spiritually and mentally blinded we should hold to these facts: the Antichrist is a man, he will surely hold a unique spiritual office, he will oppose himself to Christ's divine plan of salvation: Doing Satan's work he must use Satan's method of deceit, he will come during and to some extent be responsible for a great falling away among Catholics, he will do more than can be believed by most people.  Remember that the Apocalypse depicts a spiritual not a physical combat between the powers of heaven and the malignant powers of hell.  Physical violence enters only as a result of moral disorders.  In this connection there exists for the first time in history that physical power (atomic) by which man can destroy a large part of mankind.

   Had the Catholic reader of this paper been told thirty years ago that a pope could change the Mass so that non-Catholic ministers could join in celebrating it, he would have thought the questioner either totally ignorant or out of his mind.  Had this same Catholic, or any other of ordinary intelligence, been told that there would come a time when a pope would call a secular world organization "the last hope of mankind", as Paul 6 did at the UN Assembly in New York, he would have dismissed the notion as foolish.  Were Catholics told that a pope would announce "a new economy of the gospel", the reaction would have been "impossible and heretical", as of course it is.  So would I have said.  The revolution brought about by Paul 6 could not have entered my mind in advance as possible for any pope to conceive -- and of course it is not possible for a true pope.  Yet such a pope as Paul 6 and the revolution he brings about must appear in the prophetic writings, as it does -- in the prophecies of an Antichrist to come, along with a great apostasy and general spiritual blindness of the latter days.

   Twenty years ago nearly all priests would have said that what Paul 6 has done could not happen.  Today those same priests find themselves doing and upholding what they would have said couldn't happen.  And even while it is happening they say it isn't, and they blame those who point out the reality of it all.  "The pope is the pope", is all they can say now.  As everything is overturned they tell us, insanely, that nothing essential has been changed.  Today they are either attuned to the "factory siren", the modern this-world religion of Montini, or they have simply closed their eyes to that truth they were all ordained to dispense by word and deed.  No more do they put first the kingdom of God Christ gave them to teach.  But it is not Montini who will judge them; they will be judged with him.

   What these priests are preaching today, who say never mind doctrine but close your eyes in obedience, is Luther's salvation by faith alone.  Having closed their own eyes to Catholic doctrine and current reality, they would herd us all into Montini's mind- and faith-destroying Gnostic liturgy.

   It is not necessary to exhaustively analyze all the writings, opinions and errors of our time; their number is legion.  In trying to know all, and thinking to be saved by knowledge of doctrine and the antiChrist conspiracy alone, we become as Gnostic of the Bircher type.  There is no need to seek out all the details either of heresy or of apocalyptic writings.  St. Jerome said that St. John's Apocalypse contains more mysteries than words.  It is enough to notice the self-evident departures from Catholic doctrine and practice.  Up to a point it is enough!  That point is where the Traditionalist sects enter in and where the pose of Catholic orthodoxy is more convincingly maintained.  The shading off of the Traditionalist sects into a background of Theosophist Old Catholic and cash operators is more difficult to perceive than are the Vatican II modernist heresies which Pope Pius X had expertly identified as early as 1907.  The well know historian and writer Peter Anson, in his book Bishops At Large, called a large part of what now parades as Catholic traditions as "dark and shadowy", an opinion which after seven years study of the matter has become my own.  I am certain that the "operation of error" St. Paul predicted would not restrict itself to only that which calls itself Progressive.  God permits this operation of error, a loosing of Satan which Fr. Coleridge writes is judicial, and no man will ever be able to adequately deal with all its ramifications and shadings.  I do not mean by this that we cannot distinguish false doctrine from true, but only that truth is being so cleverly twisted from various angles so as "to deceive, if possible, even the elect".

GNOSTIC TRADITIONALISM

"To deceive even the elect."  This is where the Traditionalist comes in.  The Traditionalist Gnostic is often difficult to recognize by his doctrine, so orthodox does he appear to be.  Yet by one mark he is sometimes revealed -- by his appeal to the Spirit, Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, and by his obscuring or twisting into another sense the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation.  Thus we have Theosophist Liberal Old Catholic Bishop Leadbeater appealing throughout his book The Science of the Sacraments, to the Holy Spirit.  He writes in his chapter one of "the descent of the Second Person of the Trinity (not Holy Trinity, be it noted) into matter," whereas the Church had most clearly formulated simply, that God became man.  God did not merely descend into matter, which is imprecise and pantheistic, and therefore to be avoided.  The Catholic Church, having become aware of the Gnostic sects and formulations in the early centuries, stated clearly the doctrine of the incarnation as it appears in the Gospel.  St. John in his Prologue expresses the true Catholic doctrine, clearly and completely, saying, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us."  Every priest read those words in what came to be called the "Last Gospel" of the Mass.  And this formula was repeated daily by Catholics all over the world as part of the prayer called The Angelus.

   It is then significant that, while the Leadbeater "Mass" follows quite closely that of the Roman Rite before this rite was destroyed by Vatican II, it has a totally Gnostic twist, of magical outgoing force, and from it has been dropped the "Last Gospel", which was the first part of the Mass omitted by Vatican II.

   In connection with this occultist appeal to the Spirit by Theosophist Leadbeater and his garbling Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation, the chief Traditionalist leader, in an ordination sermon, speaks in the same obscure manner of the Word made flesh, as follows.

For our Lord Jesus Christ is priest for eternity... because the divinity of the word was infused into the humanity he assumed," and "the humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ was penetrated by the divinity of the Word of God, and thus he was made priest.

   I suppose that even among well educated Catholics (or such as seem to be so) few will take notice of such distortions, so long as other Catholic appearances are kept up.

   At Ecône, Switzerland, June 1976 was preached the "...infused into the humanity which He assumed ... descending into a humanity which is Our Lord Jesus Christ ... the humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ was penetrated by the divinity of the Word of God ... there is only one Word, the word of the Holy Spirit", none of which express what the Catholic Church has defined, that God BECAME MAN.  There was no infusion, no descent into.  There came into existence that which had not existed, "the Word made flesh", the God-man.  Yet not once does the Traditionalist bishop say the simple, short, yet complete orthodox form which comes from St. John's Gospel, and which is repeated in the Creed: AND WAS MADE MAN.  Why not?  A dictionary at hand has

1. infusus, pp, of infundere, to pour in, into, or upon, 2. to put qualities in, as by pouring; instill; impart. 3. to fill: pervade; imbue; inspire.

To pour coloring into water is to infuse that water with color, yet it remains water.  Nothing is thereby made that did not already exist.

   The phrase "descent of divinity into humanity" might possibly be applied in several ways; as, for instance, the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, or in quite another way, the Gnostic "you shall become as gods", neither of which is equivalent to "the Word was made flesh" or "God became man".  And why descent into "humanity"?  Because "humanity", too, not the individual man, is part of the utopian, collectivist, pantheist, doctrine of the Gnostics.  In any case God did not descend into humanity, as the Traditionalist bishop said, but became man.  It was this denial of the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation by Arians and other Gnostic sects which, so I have read, caused a pope to place St. John's Prologue near the closing of the Mass; the so-called Last Gospel, elimination of which was first of the Vatican II liturgical changes.

   On another occasion, at Dickenson, Texas, 7 July 1977, this Traditionalist bishop is quoted "as not be against the Pope in any way.  I am for the Pope.  But this attitude of the Vatican against us does not come from the Holy Ghost."  Yes, always the appeal to the Holy Ghost, or the Holy Spirit, or Spirit, whether they call themselves Progressive or Traditionalist.  An honest and orthodox Catholic bishop would cite facts and doctrine against Paul 6.

   There existed from the beginning of Vatican II, and long before that, a division between those Theosophists or Gnostics who favored the vernacular and those who thought that liturgy in an archaic language produced a greater "outgoing force".  And as Gnostics both sides make their appeal, not, of course, to the popes, but directly to the Holy Spirit, or Spirit.  But we need not base our conclusions on these doctrinal obscurations alone, which most laymen do not grasp.  The contradiction of a bishop who harps on his loyalty to Catholic Tradition, yet professes his loyalty to Paul 6, knowing as any bishop must know, that Montini's destructive program has to be deliberate, totally opposed to the Catholic Faith, shows that bishop to be of the same Gnostic party as Paul 6.

   But I've written enough on that in other papers.  And I know it is futile to try to dissuade those who insist that in these times anyone can set up his own Church or public chapel.  Only this comment here: these chapels attract like flies every shade of Traditionalist heretic and occultist, and no attempt is made to keep them out.  As I've written before, this is surely a "practical" reason for the divine mandate of papal jurisdiction over priestly ordinations, and over those public churches or chapels where Mass may be offered and the Sacraments dispensed.  This divine mandate, the Keys to Peter, is not made void by the fact of a false pope in the papal chair.

   One of the Traditionalist operations, one which has attacked Paul 6 and his Novus Ordo, announced its "Ecclesiastical Tribunal which is coordinated into denominational sections, such as the Roman Catholic Section, the Eastern Orthodox Section, the Old Roman Catholic Section, Lutheran Section," etc.  More of that "widest possible meaning" of the Gnostics.  An enquirer was assured by the lay leader of this outfit that Masons are welcome to join.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The works of Satan are mainly those of confusion and divisions.  The religion of the Antichrist is therefore one of total opposition to Christ and His truth, to the unity of His divine order.  He will do within the Church, worldwide, what the many promoters of division, the "many antichrists" of St. John's gospel, have done on a limited scale, and he will do so by pretending to a new and higher vision than that of the true popes.  As I have shown in the first part of this Letter, this is according to the pretensions of those whom true scholars have called the Gnostics.

   No one can deny that since the coming of Paul 6 Catholic unity has disintegrated, so that now we have Progressives, Pentecostals, phony seers, false mysticism (extremely deceptive), and several dozen Traditionalist sects, inclusing that of the retired French bishop, above referred to, who as virtual or standby pope has set up his own international Church, seminaries and all.  There are also the moderates who accept more or less of the new religion, who more or less support Paul 6.  The divisions among the moderates cannot even be named, so nebulous and constantly shifting are they, dividing even families.  There are many shadings of truth and of feelings, of Catholic orthodoxy or lack of it in all this, a great confusion of minds, which is Satan's own thing.  As already mentioned, it is the "operation of error" that St. Paul spoke of and which, in the words of St. Thomas, quoted at the start of this Letter, is perfected and brought to a head in the one Holy Scripture calls The Antichrist.

   My basic conclusion and advice to those who want to keep the Faith is this: Whether or not you grasp the details that I have set down here, and regardless of possible doubts about what I have written in other Letters concerning the divine law and papal jurisdiction against organizers of new Churches and public chapels, there is sufficient reason to be extremely wary of all offers of Mass and Sacraments from those who call themselves Traditionalists.

   There does exist a Traditionalist "ecumenism", a Traditionalist Gnosticism.  Stay away from all of them.  And do not attend the parish churches, all of which impart the "new religion" by means of the Gnostic liturgy of Vatican II and Paul 6.  Of this liturgy, which non-Catholics joined in composing, two venerable cardinals with their thirty-two associate theologians made the following summary comments:  "This new Ordo represents as a whole and in its details a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass".  And, "It is evident that the Novus Ordo has no intention of presenting the Faith as taught by the Council of Trent, to which, nonetheless, the Catholic conscience is bound forever."  These theologians say further that this "Mass" of Paul VI "teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the purity of the Catholic religion and dismantles all defenses of the Faith"; that is, it gradually destroys the Catholic sense and belief of those who take part in it.  The evidence of this is there for all who will look at it directly.

   This brings to mind what I wrote in one of my "Strange New Church" papers: that it is the respectable, the reverent, the apparently right-intentioned priest who will be most effective in imposing this false Mass on the generality of Catholics.  Of these, one who does not himself perform the Novus Ordo, is the French priest Georges de Nantes who insists that his followers attend Paul's Gnostic liturgy.  The Abbe de Nantes also advocates joining with the leading modernist Gnostics in a Third Vatican Council.

   So much for conclusions.  As I wrote that last paragraph, there arrived a letter containing this bit of advice: "...try to get the feeling for the Holy Father's way of leading the Church". ...by reading L'Osservatore Romano.  In that sentence is expressed acceptance of the Gnostic pretension of Paul 6 to a higher knowledge, a mysterious vision, and therefore Paul's "new style of government".  The letter writer is a Catholic who, like millions of others, has accepted the Montini "new economy of the Gospel" gradually, without having given a thought to Montini's heresy or his own drift into this heresy.  It is safe to say that he never heard the explicit expression of Montini about his new gospel.  And like millions of Catholics this letter writer thinks that in defending Paul 6 he is defending the Catholic Faith.  In his short bit of advice we have a sample of the spiritual blindness St. Paul predicted would be widespread in the time of The Antichrist.

   My apologies to regular readers for repeating so often things I've written in other papers.  The reason for this is, first, my constant concern to reach other Catholics with the whole truth, or as much as we know, as well as to make some advance in my own discernment and yours of the evil spirits abroad in our time.  It is not a matter of wanting knowledge for its own sake, of wanting to know both good and evil, which can be spiritually dangerous, but of being not merely simple as doves, but wise as serpents, if we are to avoid the innumerable snares of the devil since Vatican II.  All this being so, I shall continue in my next Letter the line of investigation thus far carried on.

   I have been asked what I think of Malachi Martin's The Final Conclave.  I think it is a masterpiece of gnostic confusion -- that it might well have been called Malachi's Malarkey.  I find it disappointing in that it lacks even those bits of accidental useful information that I had expected to find in a gossip book about the Vatican.  I didn't read the tiresome last part, but only glanced over it.  Paula Haigh does an excellent job of reviewing it in her last paper.