It statatata. I want my way home. I can't break you. I
want my way home. Can't break to save. I want my way home.
Can't break to save. I want my way home. Can't break your
see. I want my way home. Can't break your see. I want
my way home. Tamp break to save. I want my way home,
tamp break to save. In the press espressions, pass expressions, Francis expressions,
expressions, fans expression that us this heavy, that us this heavy,
that us this heavy, that us this heavy case. Using a look at
me, ammen, love, look at me, ammen love. Someone can
send that spending. Cans can send that spending. All right, Welcome back,
ladies and gentlemen. This is David Patrick Harry but Church of the Eternal
Logos and today, hey, I have the Great, the mighty, the
powerful Jay Dyer with us today. How you doing today, brother, No,
great man, thanks for having me back. Glad to be here.
Oh man, I'm glad that you're here. I've I'm a huge fan of
your work, as you know, and you've been killing it on the Info
Wars lately. Oh thanks, I've been watching your fourth hours and dropping those
those red pills for the more normy crowd. We just need you to get
the the orthodox on Alex Jones, some of his Christian theology. Yeah,
I've done a couple of Fourth Hours where I tried to you know, slip
in worthoxiology, even did one whole Fourth Hour on father Suffer Roses nihilism,
So nobody's really had any problems with me talking about that stuff. Of course,
I don't know, you know, how much of the Fourth Hour Alex
always sees. I know he watches some of the installments I do, but
I don't know if he sees them all. So uh, yeah, that
that's up in the air. But definitely, you know, pray for him.
And I saw your Rogan stream, so you know, pray for for
Rogan too, because you know they know each other. So hopefully, hopefully
eventually the you know, the seeds of Orthodoxy can you know, filter out
in that direction. Amen to that. So today I asked you to come
on and talk to us about the Vatican, about Catholicism, and so before
we dive too deep in any of the topics, because I really we see
the Pope, we see the Vatican essentially being a catalyst for many of the
things of your contents that you talk about, whether it be the globalism,
the great Reset, the really technological entrapment of humanity. Seems like the Vatican's
a little bit on board with this stuff. And I want to go through
some of these evils that it seems like we're seeing from a sort of,
as you said, a sort of spiritual Babylon that we're we're witnessing in the
Vatican. But before we even get into the evil that we want to address,
you want to, you know, give insights to people of what we're
not saying, that we do recognize the unification of the original Church, that
we do recognize quote unquote Catholic saints, certain ones aligned with Orthodoxy. And
just before we even dive into any of the topics, what what you want
to share with people, like where we're going, where we're not going.
Yeah, that's a great idea. I think that you know, a lot
of the debates, a lot of the apologetics in the last few years has
got a little nasty because Roman Catholics are angry at a lot of the stuff
that we do. You know, we've seen so many people convert from Rome
Catholicism to Orthodoxy, so so there's some sour grapes, some some lemons there
in terms of attitudes. But uh, you know, from my vantage point,
I don't have any personal hatred towards Roman Catholicism. I don't hate the
Roman Catholic Church or anything like that. I oppose them, and particularly you
know the head of that system and how he is steering that entity, and
so really it does come from a position of concern and love and care for
Roman Catholics. We want them to be united with us, but we can't
have a false union, and so the only path to real union and restoration
I think has to come through truth. Right, you can't have unity without
truth, and you can't have true without unit. They kind of go together,
so they're not either ores. And you know that, as you said,
we do share commonality the first thousand years of the Church, roughly speaking,
where certainly we would acknowledge many holy popes of Rome, many saints that
are popes of Rome, you know, Saint Leo, the great defender of
the you know, to natures in Christ with his tone at Chalcedon, and
of course many other saints of Rome. So there's nothing inherently wrong with apostolic
succession or the Apostolic Sea Rome or anything like that. But obviously, as
everybody knows, I think in this audience, the divergence comes after about a
first you know, first thousand years, and there's already the seeds of the
split between the East and the West prior to you know, ten fifty four,
but the beginning of the split is really in the late eight hundreds,
nine hundreds, and then it kind of comes to full fruition in my view,
in twelve seventy four the Council of Lions and then successively later at the
Council of Florence. Because after the Council of Lions in twelve to seventy four
in the West, you have the full on acceptance of the Philly Oakuay in
the sense of a double hypostatic procession, and then you get the response of
the Orthodox, which are the Palomite Synods, to explicitly reject that. And
those have been received universally throughout the whole world of Orthodoxy. They're part of
the Lent and liturgy we affirmed and the teaching and affirmation of the Palomite Synods
in Saint Gregor Palomas, So we know that we can't accept the philly oquid
doctrine, given the fact that the Paloma Synods reject it, and they reject
it very clearly. Sa Grey Palmus has a whole work that Father heres has
recently translated into English English called the Apedictic Treatise on the Holy Spirit, which
really quells gets rid of any notions of there being a reconciliation in the sense
of, oh, it was just a dispute over words, and we all
mean the same thing. No, we don't, I mean. And Saint
Grego Palm has meant a very clear in the Apidicted Treatise on the Holy Spirit
that the Latin Church is following Satan. There they're Satanic, and he was
saying that all the way back then. And he also said similar things to
Barleum in the in the Triads and in the debate with the barleym might I
can Dinos that if you follow this course, you will lead your church and
your group into atheism. And that's precisely what we've seen the West do ideologically,
is go down the course of the track of atheism. So long story
short, you know, there's nothing We're not saying everything that you believe is
false or that you're evil because you're Roman Catholic that the system is wrong.
And that's what you know, I really like to get into and focus on,
is the system addicts and how the systems don't work. And when you
have bad systems, what happens is that they produce bad results, and they
can produce civilizationally catastrophic results. And that's what's happened in the West. Yeah,
and as Orthodox, I mean, we can point to my favorite church
father, Saint Maximus the Confessor, and how he had to appeal to Rome
during the time that he was living because of the controversies of what was going
on in the East, and it was actually the West that aided. But
again, this is pre schism. This is before the establishment of the papacy,
and where we really see the split of the One Holy Orthodox Catholic Church
into the papacy again, unleavened bread, Eucharist, the Holy Roman Empire,
the alliance with Charlemagne, all this different stuff where it seems like the things
get way more political than theological as history goes on. So thank you for
beginning there. Now, privately we kind of went back and forth and you
shared with me a news clip about Pope Francis's new alliance with the Islamic world
in this new what Abrahamic religious center, and it seems like with what's going
on post Koufid is a new one world religion, and in fact, they're
openly wanting to build structures promoting this concept. I would love for you because
I feel like this is really a central point when we look at the evils
of the Vatican, because we're going to go through a lot of them,
but the new one World religion hints at a lot of the preference for unity
over multiplicity, ecumenicism, globalism, alliance with what it seems to be the
sort of technological one world government that the Pope Francis seems totally in step with.
And so can you dive into the Vatican the Pope, how long has
this process actually been moving in this attempt for the Vatican to really be the
sort of figurehead. It seems like it seems like the Pope's the new religious
leader of the new one world religion. I think that's definitely where it could
go. And I think that there seemed to be some pretty clear indications that
Etis would certainly like to be in that role. We saw, I mean
in terms of I think clear indicators of this idea in the dogmatic decrees and
definitions of Vatican two, and they are dogmatic, despite however many Roman Catholics
want to say they don't have to accept Vatican two. It was a firm
with full papal authority, it's from the chair, and it deals with faith
and morals. That's really all that's needed to be under the status of dogmatic
declaration for a Roman Catholic. And in fact, I have a whole video
where I go through four separate documents from the papacy actually affirming and making it
very clear that Vatican two is dogmatic. You do have to accept. There's
not an optional council for Roman Catholic and there's at least four places in other
Roman Catholic dogmatic papal statements that affirm that. So we get if we get
that out of the way, then we can come to documents like Atata.
I don't know if you're familiar with this, but this is one of the
more famous Vatican two documents, and it's the October twenty eighth, nineteen sixty
five document. It's about five pages, six pages. It's not that long,
are you familiar with this. No, I'm not too familiar, can
you. So everybody should be familiar with this, and everybody should read it
because it's not very long. And I think what you'll notice is kind of
the point that we're getting at here, which is that this idea of generic
theism, that there's a generic, universal idea of just some God that everybody
agrees on, and that therefore we can find paths to unity from that is
really what undergirds the very thing that we're looking at with this House of the
Faith of Abraham or whatever it is. And I sent you a link there.
There's another there's another proposed version of this over in Germany. Somebody is
saying too that there's a there's proposed versions of this over in the United Arab
Emirates. And the idea is that, well, we're going to just get
together under a common banner, not of the accidents, but the essentials.
Right, So this applying the Resitilian distinction of essence and accidents to to this
idea that, well, don't we all believe in one God? And if
we all believe in one God, then we're all on the same page,
at least as far as that goes, and then we can just consider the
other stuff like Jesus and Trinity and resurrect virgin birth. Maybe those are all
just kind of like add ons, and they're not the essentials. And this
lowest common denominator fallacy just keeps getting whittled down right to where ironically, at
Vatican two and Nostra Tat I'm going to read it, it says, throughout
the long history to the present day, there is found amongst different peoples a
certain awareness of some hidden power which lies behind the course of nature and the
events of human life. At times there is present even a recognition of a
supreme being, perhaps a father. This awareness and recognition results in a way
of life that is imbued with a deep religious sense. The religions that are
found in more advanced civilizations endeavor by a way by way of well defined concepts,
an exact language to answer these questions. Thus Hinduism Hinduism. In Hinduism,
people explore the divine mystery and express it in limitless niches ahime me riches
of myth, and the accurately defined insights of philosophy. They seek release from
the trials of the present day and the ascetical practices profound meditation, and they
have recourse to God Capital G in confidence and love. So they're literally said
is literally saying that Capital G, the God of Hinduism is the God that
we all worship. Because they're believing in a God. There's some supreme God,
a supreme being, and so the iron here is that so this is
equivalent to me equating as long as I say it's a supreme being, which
in linguistic philosophy we call that a non rigid designator. There's a paper that
Father Diacon and I covered by a doctor Garibee, which is actually critiquing this
notion of generic theism, or the idea that just because all the monotheistic religions
affirm a God, that they're affirming the same God. Well, that's actually
a fallacy, and it's known as the quantification shift fallacy. And the reason
it's a fallacy is because it should be obvious that because we're all affirming one,
it doesn't equate to the fact that it's the identical one that we're all
affirming, Right. I mean, I could say there's one God. Another
guy down the road could say, oh, there is one God. I
agree with you, but he means Satan, right, I'm certain maybe maybe
he attends the Temple of set Church or or the Satan. What's the new
thing that's they've got the abortion ritual that they're talking about, the Satanic Satanic
Temple. Yeah, the Satanic Temple, that's it. Yeah, maybe he
believes that it's Lucifer, that's the one God. But does it follow from
the fact that we all believe in one God that it's the same God.
No. No, And that's what's known as the quantifier shift fallacy. Other
examples of this in logic would be situations where we say something like every woman,
every girl loves a boy, therefore every girl loves the same boy.
Right, Right, everyone is born of a woman, therefore everyone is born
of the same woman. Right. They're obvious fallacies, right, All of
these religions believe in one God, therefore they believe in the same God.
Now, when we come to, you know, something like the New Testament,
what's perhaps an example of a religion that's very close to you know,
some of the things that we we would affirm. Maybe they even have a
lot of the books shared with us. Let's say Judaism. Judaism affirms that
Father does Jesus say that just affirming the Father is enough? No? No,
he says that no one comes to the Father but through me. Because
the word father. If God's eternally a father, according to Saint Anthonatius,
he's eternally the father of an eternal son. Right, So the word father
necessitates and implies the son. Right. So I'm no more joined with that
religion than I am with an Arian or Jehova's witness Right. I mean,
Job's witnesses say there's one God. So are we all on the same team?
Well, the same Basil didn't think so. I mean he wrote gigantic
treat and like spent his whole life combating the idea that we're all of the
same faith. Right. And in fact, if you look at the Niceno
Constantapolitan Creed, it designates the One God as the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and that implies, by necessary implication, the Son and the Spirit.
As the Cappadocians famously said, I can no longer think of the one
being the essence of God or the person of the Father, as I am
quickly bound over to think of the three. And I can no longer think
of the three without quickly being referred back to the one. So there's an
equal ultimacy of the one and the many in the trinity. So there's no
such thing as kind of picking out because of there being commonalities that there's therefore
one lowest common denominator religion. And if you read the Gharibie paper, he
points out that if there's a lowest common denominator religion that is just the commonalities
in these various so called monotheistic fates or Abrahamic faiths, then that's actually a
third other religion. Right, that's that's not the other three you see,
And that's all you can. You can prove that logically by a conjunct where
you put, for example, in in parentheses, and logic you could say,
we're gonna list, let's say the beliefs of Orthodox Christianity that make Orthodoxy
Orthodoxy, right, so that would be A would be the trinity, B,
Virgin birth, C, you know, incarnation, D, resurrection.
Right, Let's say all of the beliefs that are necessary components of Orthodox Christianity,
they're in these parentheses A, A, B, C, D,
E, F Z. Right. If we take out oh but wait a
minute, one of those beliefs is that God's on mission, so maybe that's
a you know, G. Well, Jews and Muscles believe that God's on
thisissance, so they believe G right. But is G the same as the
set that's up here in the parentheses. No, No, it's not.
And even if I take elements out commonalities, it's not this set because this
set is everything in totality. It's a total set that's in the parentheses.
And this is just logic showing that there's no such thing as a core religion
that is the core of these three monotheistic Abrahamic face It's am It's a simple
way in logic, in linguistic philosophy to show that this set is not this
set merely because there's common things. Another point, too, is that he
makes in the Garbye paper and makes some really great examples or analogies to a
card games. If I'm playing poker and then I'm playing, you know,
Crazy eights, does the fact that Poker and Crazy Eights use cards mean they're
playing a same game the same game? No? Does the fact that there's
cards and rules involved mean that there's actually a common core game that's neither Poker
nor crazy eights. No, of course not. It's this nonsense, right.
So in other words, this set of beliefs is going to determine the
reference in the set. And that's why it's a holistic, it's a whole
systemic thing. And so the word God is in linguistic philosophy, it's known
as a non rigid designator. And what we mean by that is that it's
not a personal pronoun. It doesn't pick out anything specific. Even in scripture,
the word God just little case God. It could refer to the person
of the Father. It could refer to the whole Trinity. It could refer
to divine actions or attributes with the divine essence. It can refer to angels.
Angels are called gods, Elohim, sons of God. It could refer
to humans. I will make you as a god to Pharaoh, right,
God says to Moses. And it could refer to us in deification. It
could refer to demons, right, the gods of the nations. So the
point here is that it's abatance witch the fact that the other religions use the
word God, or the word monotheism, or the word you know, whatever
that's in common. Will e been an omniscient God. You believe in omniscient
God, so it's the same God. No, it's not, because the
rest of the set of beliefs about our God is just as necessary as any
single member of the set right. The Father is just as necessary as Holy
Spirit. Holy Spirit is just as necessary as Son, as as omniscience.
You can't start just subtracting from them. And there's no argument to be made
for some of God's attributes being more self evident than the others. They all
go together. It's holistic. You don't like, learn the essence of God
and then down the road like Tomism says, we'll tack on trinity, we'll
tack on virgin birth. No, no, it all goes together, right,
it's a set right. Just based on what you said, this idea,
the sort of manipulation or the word concept fallacy, it almost feels like
there's magical cannontations underneath this. Like I've spoke before that magic is all about
the manipulation of language and meaning, which then alters people's perceptions of reality.
And I can't help but think when we start looking at Catholic history or you
know, perennialism itself, this idea of the Abrahamic religions really all sort of
saying the exact same thing. We can point back to the Iberian Peninsula in
Spain with the Moorish occupation, where they allowed for all these mystical traditions to
study each other and even smoke hashiesh coming out of Northern Africa. And then
right after that we start looking at the fifteenth century, the fourteen hundreds.
We get the Italian Renaissance, we get the translation of the Hermetic Corpus,
we get Marcillo Ficino, Giovanni, Pica della Marindola, and we see magic,
Chaldean oracles, Sufism, Kabbala, and Christian mysticism all come together in
this sort of new understanding of what man is, of what religion is.
And this is where the perennialism itself, if you're going to trace that idea
really gets going, is the thirteenth century Spain, and Catholicism has really been
associated with this concept ever since. Yeah, I was going to bring up
the Renaissance origins of a human them actually, because this is a more accurate
thesis on the real origins of a humanism way way prior to Vatican two.
So, for example, if you read a Cult Renaissance Church of Rome,
Hoffman shows in that book that the real origins of the ideas of a common
root of the religions, a skeletal root religion that is neither Christianity, nor
Orthodox, nor Islam nor you know, Judaism, is itself a religious presupposition
that comes out of philosophical schools. So it's kind of a neo Platonic approach,
and it's an approach as you said, that it gets adopted eventually by
the perennial schools, which are really just borrowing from neo Platonism to try to
find the grand ultimate skeletal backbone of what the world religions are, which are
just kind of masks. So the perennialist idea, which again is not new,
it was already had and seed formed by Neoplatonists, and then it's regardeditated
by the neoplatonic schools that really influence the people in the Italian Renaissance. It's
just regurgitating things that had already been rejected in the first seven Councils. So
actually, if you read, for example, Myandor's book Business Ideology, there's
a whole chapter on the rejection of Neoplatonism. And this is why you get,
for example, the visiting Emperor Saint Justinian is the one who started closing
down the Platonic Academy and these schools, because what happens is in the sonoticicon
there's an explicit rejection of Platonism, Neoplatonism in this end this idea which manifests
in the chapter that he wrote called the It's about the humanists, monastics and
humanists, and so this eventually manifests is a warfare between neoplatonism. And this
even gets into iconography because the iconoclass are actually rejecting iconography on neoplatonic grounds.
They all neoplatonic arguments. This comes up in St. Theodore the Studai.
It's repeated in the Alspinsky Treatise with Theology the icon in the chapter on Gregory
Palomos, because pallemism is what undergirds the affirmation of iconography. The energy's doctrine
is crucial and fundamental to why we do iconography. It's the apologetic argument that
they use at the Seven Council. St. Theodore and Saint John Damascus talk
about the energies being the reason why iconography is useful, correct, important,
pedagogical and also mystical. I mean, this is why the Saints have a
golden halo. It's because that's signifying the uncreated light. Icons themselves are teaching
the essence energy doctrine. And so when we get to the Renaissance period,
there's a rejection of that idea of icons and iconography having a specific liturgical setting
and meaning and significance, and there's rubrics for how you do it. You
don't do Chinese Jesus because Jesus wasn't Chinese secifically. See at the time of
Charlemagne and after that's when the Western Church departs right in many ways from the
liturgical norms and from the Seventh Council. The Romancalolic Church never has really accepted
the actual teaching of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. They afferm it in principle,
but for them, oh, that just means we can do Jesus art right,
and you can do anything. So you can have God the Father as
an old man. No, actually, the Seventh Machemical Council says you cannot
paint God the Father as an old man. And it says that's a heretical
and idolatrous notion. No man has seen the Father at any time, Jesus
says, and never will because the only icon of the Father is the person
of the Son. The hypostasis of the Son is the only icon of the
Father. And so there can be symbolic representations of the Father in the sense
of the three angels in the you know the famous Abrahamic Rublev icon, there's
a symbols that represent the Trinity. But we make it very clear if you
read the later icon count in Moscow, they explicitly know that those icons are
not portraying the person of the Father, right, any more than the number
three is like portraying the person of the Father. It's represents a symbolic it's
what's called the idos of the icon, but it's not the hypostasis of the
Father. And that's made very clear for a reason. Anyway, long story
short is just that iconography. Orthodox theology is very clear, very precise on
these topics, and it is always stressed that, as the Nice in Crete
says, the one God is the Father, the Son, and the Spirit
principally right when we begin our Trinitarian theology, it's the person of the Father.
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, right, And then
yes, I also affirm God from God like from Light, the Son,
and the Spirit. Right, So one God can pick out different things.
It can mean the person the Father, it can mean the entire triad,
it can mean the divine essence that they share. It can even pick out
the attributes or energies that God has, because God is fully present in every
energy. Sure, but the point is just that if we understood even just
iconography itself. Right, And this is another point I'm gonna it's gonna come
up, I'm sure in the debate in a few days with Trent, because
we'll be debating this very topic. Is that you know, God for us
has a specific reference and it means Trinity. Right. It's it's the persons
of the Trinity. There's no such thing as generic theism. Just even by
linguistic philosophy, God is a non rigid designator doesn't tell you. So you're
absolutely right that it's a kind of abate and switch. I don't know how
self conscious the authors of the Vatican Two documents actually were, because some of
this is really dumb, and it's really low level argumentation like because they pray
and because they you know, seek out things in their idolatrous religion, that
therefore it's the same god as us. I mean, that's just not just
non sequitors, that it's that it's our God. And do you think this
emphasis on, like you said, the neoplatonic presupposition of the sort of skeletal
schematical framework of all world religions and noise comes back to this unknown or transcendent
one again relates to the ancient Greek problem of the one in the many and
this historical prevalence to privilege unity over multiplicity. And you see this in Tomism,
you see this in absolute divine simplicity in which you've talked about, uh,
you know at nauseum on yours on your channel. But Orthodoxy doesn't have
this dialectical tension between multiplicity and unity, and therefore you actually find a balance,
You actually find a harmony at an intellect and an intellectrical intellectual, you
know, theological level. There's a balance there. Do you think that this
has any ties back to absolute divine simplicity? What absolutely does. And that's
not anything that I came up with. In fact, countless Orthodox Saints and
Theolorerogens have been saying this for a long time. In fact, in the
little book that's kind of the good if you want an introduction to this topic
and what we're talking about here, don't. I don't affirm everything that that
this author writes, but this book is really good and it's called Church Papacy
Schism by Philip Chrard. And really the whole thesis of this book is that
the imbalance and the one the many is kind of what undergirds the Roman Catholic
system. So papalism itself never could have really arisen if the pope didn't kind
of arrogate himself to the office and roll of what the Holy Spirit does.
So it's not accidental that the rise of the papal monarchy in the early Middle
Ages is at the same time as a direct correlation, direct provable connection between
that and the imbalance that occurs in the Philioquay doctrine. The Philioquay doctrine creates
a diad. And again I would just say read Saint Photias's mystagogy because he
says improves in you know, about eighty pages that if you give the power
in particular property of the person the father to the son. Now you have
a father son. Now you have a diad, right, and that diad
of father's son which produces the third person, the father son. There that
diad actually has the power of producing a person that the spirit lacks. So
now, in this silly effort to try to prove the deity of the Christ
against arianism, which is kind of the motivations of why the Philioque was rolled
out to begin with, which is all kind of a mistake and a misunderstanding
anyway, it really has the opposite effect of subordinating the Spirit. So if
the Holy Spirit is subordinated in the life of this institution, which is precisely
what all of our saints and theologians said that the filiok we would do again,
just read the mystagogy of Saint Photius. He said it would do that.
And then what happens is that now we need a humanistic role for the
Holy Spirit embodied in the person of the Pope. Now the Pope is the
voice of the Holy Spirit, the voice of God on earth. It is
no longer the immediate, innate, direct presence of the in the life of
the Church. It's now an extra juridical office that speaks in this way.
And so the pope really becomes the the bridge of the philioquay now or the
Holy Spirit comes into the church, he kind of replaces Christ in the economia.
And that's the argumentation that that Chirard makes, which I've always thought was
a really really powerful argument, and it's and he makes the argument that it's
on the basis of absolute divine simplicity that this even happened. I mean,
Photius himself even says this that the simplicity doctrine that the Cappadocians and the Church
adopted is not the simplicity doctrine of the West adopted. And so they even
noticed that at the time. That's what undergirds the whole debate of the Phillyoquay,
at the time of Photius and at the time of the Council Alliance.
And when you read the Tomos of the Palomite Synods and the Palmite theology of
that time, and they appredictive treat use of Saint Gregory against the Latins,
it's all saying what I'm saying. It's none of this stuff is like me
making it. So it's just in these documents, very clear, very lucid
logical presentation, by the way, which should show people that there's nothing antithetical
to Palainism and apologetics and logic. I mean he's using Ariscytian logic. That's
what the appedictic treatise means. Right. So, given the Vaticans theological presupposition
of absolute divine simplicity, given now their promotion of this one world religion,
this perennialistic, this neo potonic theology, how and where do you see the
tentacles of this merge into Klaus Schwab's Great Reset. I mean, it seems
like I don't see any pushback from the Vatican. I see Vagano speak out
against a lot of this stuff. But it seems like Pope Francis is totally
in step with klau Schwab, totally in step with the Rothschilds, the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Fortune five hundred companies, the Warburg's really the CCP. Where
do you see the bridge of this presuppositional framework of unity into now the political,
economic, and actual movements of the Vatican in the Great Reset in the
one world global religion and government. Well, if you look at the famous
chapter of Dustyevsky which was prophetic. I mean, Dostiovski's Grand Inquisitor and Brothers
Karamatsa basically tells us this. He said, you know, one hundred years
ago or whatever, that the papacy would become a gigantic, geopolitical, worldly
institution to try to solve man's problems in a humanistic way. And I mean
that's again echoed in Saint Justin Papovitch's you know book Orthodox Faith in Life in
Christ, where he basically calls the papacy the exaltation of man, the worship
of man, it's the great humanistic institution, again echoing the point of Cherard
that the pope is really just taking the place of Christ, taking the place
of the Holy Spirit. And what this does is make the Roman Church into
a a geopolitical corporation, to put it simply. And I'm not the first
to make this analogy. In fact, you can go back to the Frankish
period, and that's precisely when we started to see these real alterations from the
Christianity that had been accepted in the Imperium, So that the Byzantine Imperium had
had an emperor, it had a patriarchal system already canonically approved in multiple ecumenical
councils by that time. And what happens is that the Carolinian theologians of Charlemagne's
court, they specifically did not accept the seven Ecamitical Council, and to the
Pope's credit at that time, the papacy in the days of Charlemagne affirms the
seventh Decamitical Council in communion with us. They agree with us, and so.
But what happens is that the Carolinian court is able to through certain maschinations
and through after a couple a decade or two, if you sent, excuse
me, a few centuries, you get what's called the Franco Papal Church.
And that's during this period when the patrine see moves from Rome to France.
And then we start to see a real geopolitical machination. But even in Photius's
day, sanin Photius was complaining that Charlemagne had sent missionaries into Bulgarian Orthodox jurisdictions
to try to convert them to accepting the Philly Oquay. So the philioquay was
a geopolitical tool, and this is admitted by multiple scholars now even Roman Catholics,
like this is in Cishansky's the Philly Oqui books. So it's not a
it's not an orthodox reading of history. It's in Roman Catholic theology now too,
in history. So he basically sends missionaries to try to get people to
accept, oh, you don't have the right creed. You see. See,
if you want to be on the right page, you got to be
you gotta have Charlemagne's creed, you see. So you see how it's a
geopolitical tool, right, and so he's converting Orthodox territories over to this fall
false you know, affirmation of an addition to the creed. And the pope
at that sign Leo right had even stated, no, you can't right change
the creed, so he agreed with us right at that time. Well,
what happens is that eventually the Franco papal power starts installing people who are geopolitical
tools of the Franks. And this is nobody denies this. I mean,
this is why, this is why the Sea of Rome is in France for
eighty years. I mean, this is Avignon papacy, very famous, very
well known. Out of this, we get three different dudes claiming to be
the true pope. It's the famous it's the famous Great Western schism. And
I mean, but I don't think Roman Catholics understand that when you accept the
papacy, like you're taking that on, like you're owning that right, that's
part of your thing, and you're having to admit, yeah, sure that
happened. I don't have a problem with that, so what. But I
don't think that they realize that it was a council, that it's convene to
solve this issue, the Council of Constance. And then they just turn around
and say, yeah, but of course councils aren't superior to popes. No,
wait a minute, so three rival popes the issue is solved by a
council deciding which one's pope. But then also, councils aren't a bove.
But it's just silly, right, I mean, there's so many examples of
this kind of stuff in history, which one of the key killer examples we'll
get through here in a moment, which is Constantinople one, the second Ecumenical
Council. But I know I'm rambling, but this backstory is necessary to understand
how we get to the world where we are now where the papacy is really
just a geopolitical NGO. The best way to understand the papacy in terms of
what it really is is an NGO kind of international corporate mafia at the top.
Okay, not saying everybody in the Roman County church is part of this,
but this is why we're seeing so much corruption in the Vatican Bank for
so many years, so much corruption in terms of the pedo scandals that everybody
knows is all about. In fact, they just a lot of it.
Roman Catholics are coping about the recent French report that was released by the French
bishops. So that wasn't They're all saying, there's the liberal media, the
liberal media, liberal media. No, it's your own bishops that really start
import Dude, it's not the liberal media. I mean, how long are
they going to keep buying it? It was just the liberal media, liberal
media. No, it's real corruption in that church. The other one is
I've noticed lately on the Catholics they want to point to American public school systems
that it's way worse than the church and that this is just a pr stunt
to make the church look bad, which is laughable at best. Well,
the bishop's report out of France was what two hundred thousand victims in the last
sixty years, two hundred thousand from the Catholic bishops of France. That's not
from the Boston Globe or the Washington Post. Okay, that's not from liberal
entities. But that's just an example of how like the hamster wheel of justification,
rationalization, and coping that goes on when you talk about this stuff is
just kind of mind boggling. And it's really because that is I genuinely believe
it's a system of dead works that Paul talks about that doesn't actually have the
power. Right. So Paul says, in the Last Times, you will
notice there will be a kind of fake church that has the appearance of guidliness
but lacks the power thereof and is characterized by dead works. And I can't
think of any better system that exemplifies that than the Roman Catholic system, where
it's literally a denial of uncreated grace, literally the denial of the direct perception
of God through the news. I mean, they don't have a news doctrine,
so how are they going to have uncreated grace and the direct perception?
But they don't. It's explicitly rejected for a long time. So and that
is all yes, because of heretical trinitarian theology. They went heterodox a thousand
years ago, and Photius was right all along. And the mere fact that
the the Roman system has it's it morphs and changes. That's the amazing thing
here is that uh it had They had this ability to appeal to truths and
falsees at the same time and morphed the position. And no better example this
than you know, if you look at the landscape of Roman Catholicism, a
Roman Catholic can in his own mind basically construct what the church is right.
And you can have a guy over here who's a trad who for him,
the Roman Catholic Church is the Urban the second calling the Crusades against Islam,
right, that's the Roman falsism, That's what I believe in. And then
you have another dude over here who's like, you know, uh, father
Bruce, and for him, Roman Catholicism is uh mother Teresa going and praying
in Buddhist temples, which she did, by the way, So what a
which which is it? Is? It? Is it? Francis and Benedict
praying in the mosque towards Mecca. Is that authentic Roman Catholicism or is it
crusades against Islam in the Middle Ages. Well, the thing about Romeantholicism,
you can make it whatever you want, right, it can be all of
these things and none of these things, because it's a system that lends itself
to that malleability under the superstructure of the appearance of dogma. But even when
we get to that, we actually find out that the Roman Catholic as an
individual is in no better position than anyone else. They're always saying, you
don't have a way to know the dogmas. You don't have a no way
to know what's true and false. You don't know what the dogmas are.
They're in the exact same existential position as anyone else, Protestant or Orthodox.
Because I've got right here gigantic tones of Catholic theologies, specifically the papal stuff
over there, thousands of pages of papal teaching. As an individual Roman Catholic,
how are you in any better position? Since I mean, I've got
my stack over here of church fathers and councils, You got your stack over
here of papal teachings, how do you, as an individual Catholic know for
sure that you're reading through the gigantic thousands of pages of papal documents and interpreting
it correct and correctly, parceling out which ones are authoritative and which ones are
not right, You're not in any better position. So the very thing that
the whole office of the papers are supposed to solve, which is having certitude
and authority over disputes, doesn't actually work. Look at the world of Roman
Policism now, they've been in seventy years of confusion and disarray. They can't
tell you what the dogmas are. They don't know if Vatican two is dogmatic.
They all disagree with one another more than the Roman, more than the
Orthodox, or more than Protestant. They are like Protestants basically. I mean,
I could go down the road and in one city we're supposed to it's
supposed to be so easy to identify the Roman Catholic Church. I can find
five different chapels that all disagree and aren't in communion or don't know. But
what Vatican two is in the actual like you know, hard city examples.
Down the road, there's an SSPX chapel, an FSSP chapel, A set
of a contest chapel, A Novasorto chapel. Right, and these all disagree
and all things the other ones are stupid heretics. And we see now that
Pope Frank is actively trying to suppress the trad Latin Mass, which again,
even despite all the things that you said, any any sort of remnants of
an older Catholicism would be president in the trade Latin Mass. They're trying to
get rid of it. And that this spirit of innovation, the spirit of
almost progressive revelation that you see the Vatican and the Papacy promote. You know,
I can't help but think about you know, this was a major influential
book on me, was God History and Dialectic and seeing how Rome is the
continuation of the Greco Roman philosophical political empire, and that you can look at
the statuary, you can look at the dialectical tensions within their theology. You
can look at well their marianology which looks very similar to Pagan Venus worship and
various stuff like that. That the establishment of the papacy as this central figure
is really a movement back to Caesar himself. That somehow there's this god man
who's also a sort of political theological figure. I mean, in my mind,
this is the papacy. And so then the papacy being a sort of
you know, Roman Empire two point zero wants post schism, and it's in
its attempt to establish the Holy Roman Empire, which exactly is what I'm claiming,
that it is the sort of Roman Empire two point oh. That no
wonder, it's this worldly you know, this worldly process to help humanity that
to you know, it's a progressive. It's a humanistic institution that's totally atheistic
now and it's an ng oh. It really is an n g oh,
it really is. And you can see it. And Pope Francis's support of
mass migration that the same Catholic country is that he's this, he's the vicar
of he's the steward of these of his Catholic flock. Well, he's okay
with all the Muslim migrants of Northern af Africa, flood France, flood Germany,
you know, flood Spain. It's totally fine, you know, we
need more refugees in Italy. That he is totally on board with all the
subversive NGOs in the world as of right now. Anyways, Yeah, and
I would add that, you know, this has been known and written about
by Roman Catholics themselves for a long time. So I don't know how many
times I have to tell the Roman Catholics to go read your own trads.
I mean, one of the best examples of this as I lectured through and
talked about this entire eight hundred page book for many years. It's almost as
important, you know, as a book like Tragy and Hope, and that's
John Courtney Murray Timelife magazine and the American proposition how the CIA's doctrinal warfare program
changed the Roman Catholic Church. And so basically wim Hoff proves in about eight
hundred pages and in about you know, a thousand plus footnotes as a trad
Catholic himself. By the ways, he's not an Orthodox person. He's not
some you know, crazy conspiracy there is. He's a lawyer who's documented in
extreme detail, you know, the history of the Roman Catholic Church's subversion.
I'm saying, the institution being subverted, them being subverted in the twentieth century.
So this is not It does deal a lot with with theology, but
it's more so a geopolitical analysis of what happened in the twentieth century from the
vantage point of intelligence analysis. So how did this institution become an NGO to
basically promote the interests of the elite in America and in the West. And
that's precisely what happened. And of course he takes key figures like John Courtney
Murray who famously was allied with CD Jackson in this creation of the doctrinal Warfare
program, which was the CIA's Cold War program, to use all institutions,
not just the Roman Cality Church, but mainly the Roman Calloity Church and Protestants
and Orthodox as well as a means for geopolitical promotion of Americanism. And this
is the Americanism of you know, the Four Freedoms and all this kind of
propaganda maloney, which is really just monetorism and consumerism right, neoliberalism right right,
and so attaching neoliberalism and consumerism and all of the other isms and leftisms
to Americanism and basically making the churches in the West, the churches in the
USA, tools of the for lack of better for the deep stay. Really,
I mean that's that's what it amounts to. In fact, the book
even details you know, a lot of the Rockefeller Foundation people and even rock
Filler himself meeting with the papacy meeting with people from the church saying we want
to fund you know, liberals and radicals like John Courtney Murray to go into
the Vatican too, to make sure that documents like sante get you know,
passed, because documents like no stant really aid in making the church into an
ecumenist institution. And that's why acumenism itself is actually a Rockefeller project. They
were putting money into ecumenism long before Batticantu, way back in the thirties,
forties, fifties. I've detailed this in my lecture on the history of the
rock Killer family. They write books talking about it. It's it's not hard
to figure out, and it's easy to see why because when you because what
monetarism, what capitalism, neoliberalism does is it wants to promote the idea of
lowest common denominator right, to push the product right. What's the easiest way
to sell this idea? What's the easiest way to sell Americanism, to sell
consumerism, to sell quantifications, that are all these ideas that are bound up
in that philosophy. Well, lowest common denominator, right, what's the easiest,
simplest way to package this? Right? And that LCD the lowest common
denominator approach, which is basically just neoliberalism applied to religion. So ecumenism is
neoliberal economic theory applied to religion as a tool of control. What's the easiest
way to get people funneled into this thing that I, as a zillionaire run
fund and control. That's what is going on, and that's why France,
this is really just a tool of the power elite, the global elite,
the banking elite, the corporate elite. Hence why he goes and meets with
Lynn Forrester, to Rawchild, and so why he meets with all the World
Economic Forum people to promote to promote what he calls, uh, what's the
word they use? Something capitalism. My mind's going like right now, it's
a new type of capitalism that's like the socially conscious. Yeah, socially conscious
whatever he called it. I'm sure somebody in the chat will remember, But
that's been I mean, that's showing that he's allied with these global entities really
to just promote the next instantiation, the next phase of what in nineteen sixty
five was still very revolutionary. So you go read the documents Vatican do,
and it's saying that, you know, the Romaic Collay Church is now accepted
religious freedom, which they had previously condemned in multiple papal encyclicals for many centuries
as a heresy of the Protestants, right, I mean, luther is condemned
for promoting religious liberty. Vatican too now accepts it as dogma. And there's
many other things you could go read in cyclicals like Marai Vos. You could
read Mortalium Animos, and I always recommend Catholics reading Mortalium animals because Pius eleven
specifically says interfaith gatherings, the humanist prayer meetings, et cetera, are apostasy.
So in nineteen twenty eight he can write in a cyclical that is universal,
ordinary, magisterian for the whole church, it's dealing with faith in morals,
and he can say that it's apostasy, and then in a few decades
the actions of praying with all the world religions is now affirmed as the work
of the Holy Spirit. So literally, the Holy Spirit flips like he changes
his mind from nineteen twenty eight to nineteen sixty five, and it's exact opposite.
Oh no, it's not apostle anymore. Now, it's good to do
that. And that shows you that the whole Roman system has always been an
amorphous, evolving innovation that just adapts to the times. And is the anti
church right? No? And so that leads me to ask you how much
power does the Vatican have? Because given everything that we're talking about, and
it being in lockstep with things like the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rothschilds, the
Fortune five hundred, you know, you hear all the people speculating, Oh,
well, it's the Vatican that rules the world. It's the Vatican Bank.
No, it's the CCP. No, it's the globalist, it's the
deep state. Where do you use what is the power of the Vatican?
Is the Vatican sort of follower of the the you know, the real billionaire
elite that the globalist elite that rule the world. Are they a follower of
this process? Are they a sort of partner in the sense that they have
comparable power, but they have different objectives and they're going because I feel like
that's kind of the CCP. The CCP is going along with the global reset
because well, they have similar objectives, but they have also very different objectives,
and so they're not in lockstep with the global elite. How do you
see the Vatican and Catholicism globally speaking, and really the attempt for the new
one world religion? Where does this fit into the billionaire global elite, the
CCP, all the conspiracy theories of who runs the world? Are they a
follower? Are they do they have do they wield real power? I would
say that they are a partner in globalism and they do have a lot of
power, but maybe not the type of power of the actual kind of inner
deep state. In other words, it was the Western elite deep state that
actually subverted and captured the office of the papacy in the last decade or seem
in the last century. So the twentieth century is really the Western elite capturing
the office of the papacy. I think the office of the papacy was already
corrupt, was already teaching bad doctrines, but they might have had a degree
of sort of independence maybe one hundred two hundred years ago. For example,
you know, if you go back to Lee of the thirteenth I mean he
wrote famous and cyclicals condemning freemasonry, being very open, you know, about
the opposition to the forces of revolutionary philosophy, the forces of atheism and materialism.
So there were still kind of the remnants of the office of you know,
combating errors in heresy back in the days of leeld the thirteenth. But
I think by the time we get up into the twentieth century, when we
get into you know, what wim Hoff is detailing in his book, that's
where we can definitely say that the Romancolic Church is a captured institution from the
top. Again, doesn't mean that at the you know level of a beganu
or these different people, you know, different trads. There aren't sincere you
know, anti nWo people. But it's just beyond any shadow of a doubt
of anybody with intellectual honesty, especially during the reign of Francis, which I've
watched very closely. I mean I've been you know, very interested in the
Romecalolic worlds since two thousand three four. So I was I was there at
the tom of John Paul, I was there for the whole period of Benedict
I saw that, and I've watched you know, the Francis conundrum catastrophe very
closely as well. And what is clear is that it's basically it does wield
power in the sense that it's a gigantic institution and has a lot of sway.
But in another sense, it's not like the papacy itself has a tremendous
amount of power in the geopolitical sphere because they themselves are I think captives of
the Western power elite. They were captured a long time ago. Avatican two
is really really a concession to Americanism and a surrendering to the power elite of
the American imperium, which is not Americans. It's right international we as Americans
are ruled by Yeah, exactly right. So the papacy, unfortunately, is
just an instant an arm of that apparatus. And I don't I don't think
that, like the Jesuits don't run the world, they're also an arm of
this apparatus. The Jesuits are a big part of again. John Courtney Murray
is a Jesuit. He was one of the people who helped pass Vatican too.
He's one of the guys who helped get no stratat in these different you
know, just horrendous documents passed which are duping all these people into thinking that,
you know, all the world religions are just on a scale of being
in a continuum. We all worship the same God, it's all the same.
That's just funneling people into what could be this emerging new world religion of
the you know, a Brahmic face. And if you read for Telly Twody,
I mean we pointed this out that Francis was intentionally putting non denominational,
anti Trinitarian prayers into the encyclical because what they want to do is have the
world religions on a kind of a concentric circle scale to where we're all part
of the same system. But really the papacy is like the key hole d
the petrine office, not just of Rome or Christianity, but of all the
world religions. You see, so you're you're a Hindo, You're just kind
of Hindus are just kind of outer further on the scale from the Muslim,
and the Muslim is is outer, it's closer than the non denominational Protestant.
And then the anomeni Protestant is a little closer, a little further out than
the Anglican, and then then you get closer in with the Orthodox, and
then you get the Roman Catholic. Right, So it's like this this concentric
circles of the world religions that you know, which is of self absurd,
right, I mean again, which everything that we've said, like in the
first hour, dealing with the fact that logically speaking, you can show that
there's no commonality you know, quantifier shift fallacy just because they use the same
word God any more than you know, uh, I'm worshiping the you know,
same deity as the scientologists because they believe in one deity. It's just
ridiculous speak a little bit. Then to the you talk about it's essentially a
sort of subverted intitution at the very top. You know, people speculate,
well, this is because the Freemasons. The Freemason said they're going to take
over the Vatican a long time ago, and they've been slowly infiltrating it.
As you said, people say, no, it's a Jesuit conspiracy withinside the
church. But the sort of liberation theolod Well that has it has Communist Marxist
tendencies talk about. Then what even the Lavender mafia talk about the subversion of
the Catholic Church. How did this elite, the sort of top of this
pyramid within the Catholic Church become subverted. Well, again, I would say
one of the clues to this would be the writings of the popes themselves about
masonry and about revolutionary philosophies. If you go and you read Gregory the sixteenth
or seventeenth was the first pope back on the seventeen hundreds to write the first
encyclical against freemasonry. There's a whole list of these multiple condinations from the Holy
Office. You can come all the way up to Leo the thirteenth where again
he wrote Humanum Janus where he was condemning freemasonry. You know, pretty strongly.
This is the you know, late eighteen hundreds, and they correctly saw
that the philosophy of masonry is a revolutionary philosophy that ultimately gives way to technocracy.
I mean, we think of some of the key revolutionary philosophers. We've
got Voltaire, We've got Saint Simon, we've got Goskomped. These are all
people who are in the circles of what those encyclicals are condemning, and so
they are. The thirteenth, for example, calls Masonry organized naturalism, which
is just to replace religion with the processes of natural science. So scientism revolutionary
technocracy is what is ultimately being kind of targeted there, and so the Lodges
have always been promoters of scientism and political revolution. This is why we don't
live in our monarchies anymore. Why the world, except for the British monarchy,
which is itself a Masonic monarchy, all the monarchies have been toppled and
what we live under is these democratic republics because that is the free Masonic philosophy.
And also part of that philosophy is scientism. You know, actually Masonry
can can encompass either Marxism, socialism, or capitalism. They're all equally fully
masonically compatible, and Freemasons have been all the above. And that's because the
end goal is none of those things, right. The end goal for those
systems is the sort of Luciferian final system or the final stage of whatever their
technocratic utopia type system is, which is transhumanism, et cetera. This is
why, you know, Huxley basically says that the technocracy of it's what the
revolutionaries of the philosos the illuminous, the vice shop, right, Jacobin,
this is what they were really after the whole time was this future technocratic utopia,
dystopia, and it's the overthrowing of thrown in altar. Right. The
fundamental element of Masonic oaths and rituals at a certain point in terms of the
philosophy is the attitude the outlook is to get rid of throne and altered,
so church and state out of there and we get the revolutionary democratic republic,
right, which is run by the you know, Elita, the techlocrats,
right that they become the new priests class basically right. So there's a long
history of that that's been going on. That's what undergirds the Masonic you know,
papal war. But exactly what date I don't know. It doesn't really
matter because most whether it was Benedict the fifteenth for example, who affirmed the
United Dates or Askum the leg of Nations, so we already had been to
fifteenth uh famously affirming and supporting the League of Nations, which is bizarre to
me. While he would do that very possible, very possible, it was
already subverted at that time. Maybe we could even point to Pious the Ninth
and Vatican One. I mean, he's the one that you know, is
confirming and affirming total papal supremacy. So maybe even Vatican One is the point
of subversion and the anti price system in the Church. And in fact,
Pious the Ninth himself was for a while a part of the revolutionary philosophy.
He was one of the young Italian revolutionaries. And then he later becomes the
Pope and he gets locked in the Vatican for a while when when when it's
besieged by revolutionaries, which are Masonic revolutionaries, so he's like, actually he's
actually under house arrest in the Vatican for a while. And then supposedly that's
when he realizes, Okay, maybe the revolution is not a good idea.
They're gonna they're gonna come behead the pope. They're not my friend. Uh,
and so he has this change of hearts, supposedly, and then he
you know, then Vatican won and all this, and so whether what this
specific date is, it doesn't really matter. And really, again, you
can go back, like you said to you can go back to the Borges
and Medichi's, the extremely corrupt papacy, Alexander the sixth they were all a
humanists, they were all, you know, Platonists, probably didn't even believe
the religion at all. Yeah, and and and you know, you can
go back for the probably to Charlemagne and the period win the papacy begins to
be not in Charlotte's day that there was a good pope at that time,
but after that is when you start getting the co opting of the office.
And so it's anybody's guess exactly when this happened. But you know, we
can look to the Vatican bank scandals of the last sixty years, the p
two, the p T Lodge, Bishop Marcinkush, the famous hanging of the
vivirtual Kylbi, the Vatican banker, to the Black pars Bridge him being murdered
by the mafia. I mean, all of that is also another indicator of
clearly at that point right when we're getting into the fifties the sixties, because
it really the visible change is John the twenty third, because pie is the
twelfth still had the remnants of some traditional ideas of the papacy, although he
did write the encyclical that allows for Catholics to accept the theistic evolution. So
in that sense you could say he was a revolutionary too. But John the
twenty third is who is the first modernist pope? Right, He writes Pacham
and teras calling for global economic interest, for a global monitoring of the economy.
You know, this kind of Ulien type stuff from John the twenty third.
John twenty third is the first to invite Protestants to come to the Vatican
to pray, to do these sort of acumenist type meetings that didn't involved prayer.
That was very revolutionary. He's the first to invite Communists to the again
very revolutionary. John twenty third of course calls Vatican two right, So at
least to public appearances, it's really John the twenty third is the first.
And there's a lot of rumors that he was involved in freemasonry and rosecution.
I don't know that's true. I don't really need to know if that's true,
because I can tell by his public actions and what he's doing a Vatican
two and what he's promoting right where he stands, right, I don't have
to know his motives. I don't have to know, you know, if
he's promoting no stratat in this kind of bullshit, then I know he's a
bad guy. So speak again with what you know. Recently, I saw
there was some priests, Catholic priests in Italy that got arrested or there was
some type of reprimmendation for them having gay orgies and buying drugs with church money,
and the whole lavender mafia, the sort of gay cardinal secret cult inside
the Vatican. Are you familiar with this? Have you heard about this?
There's been multiple books written over this is another This is just another daily news
cycle for the Vatican. I mean that's I mean, over the last fifteen
years, I've heard countless versions of this story. So this is just another
day, just another day in Rome, right, I mean walking to a
jesuit. And he was very open that it's kind of a you know,
it's not uncommon for seminarians to sleep with priests, and that this was a
sort of unspoken thing that he is as well known. Yeah, this was
a There are whole books written on this. Michael Rose has a book Goodbye
good Men, just about this issue in the last at least since Vatican two
or since the seventies of how this is like most of the Roman Catholic clergy.
I don't think people understand this. I had a good trad friend for
many years and we were having discussion about the various studies that have been done
about, you know, sexual preferences amongst from Catholic clerics, and somebody had
said, oh, the the public numbers or something like forty or fifty percent,
right being skittles. And one of my good, very active Catholic friends
at the time was like, no, it's more like seventy right. I
mean a lot of those people weren't telling the truth, and I think that
it probably is sixty to seventy percent would be my guests are skittles. And
I've known seminarians who had to leave various seminaries because they were expected to have
those kinds of relations with the rectors and with the bishops. Yeah, so
that's well known. I mean, in fact, entire orders are are skittles
and people. Everybody knows this. Yeah. Yeah, it's really sad to
see. And you can so the sexual degeneracy and then the promotion of the
sort of the global research I mean to me as an Orthodox where morality dictates
the cleanliness of one's noetic perception of reality itself. That it all goes together,
the sexual degeneracy of the global warming, the global reset, the mass
migration. It's all one thing. And I think we should point out too.
But yeah, because at a certain point, because a lot of Roman
Catholics are going to say, dude, you guys have sat you have you
guys have problems, you guys have skills. People, Hey, and the
the argument is not orthodoxy is true because you have those problems. Nobody's making
that argument. Nobody would be so foolish as to say that. Uh.
And nobody's saying, oh, orthodoxy is spot. We don't have any acumenists,
we don't have any No, no, no, that's not the point.
The point is the scope, the scale, the quantity, the promotion,
the insanity that the extremity of it. I mean we're not just talking
about I mean if you read the German report about did you see the report
about the nuns in Germany? Yes? Yeah, well you shared it.
That's how I saw it. I mean that's like, this is like a
whole other level of in the rampant examples of of the Satanic abuse in the
Roman Callolic Church. I mean it's not just you know, a corrupt bishop
of uh, you know, taking money or you know people, it's it's
like extreme Satanic stuff. Well I saw that there was a Again, I
don't know, it's curious what your opinion is. But an insider quote unquote
saying that Harry Kissinger talked about attending a black Mass in the Vatican and that
George W or George H. Bush was there, and that this is a
known thing, that there's black masses in the Vatican. Have you ever heard
about this? Yeah, I have a whole shelf on the history of that
stuff. So now I don't know if that's the case, I wouldn't be
surprised. But multiple people have written books on networks of the of the Satanic
cult and kind of secret societies in various Roman Catholic circles. I mean you
have, you know, the cardinal from Scotland best friends with Jimmy Savell,
multiple pictures of them with children. Savell was was awarded knighthood by John Paul
the second. I mean they had to know. I mean, you get
vetted by security services before you go talk to the Pope. There's no way
they didn't know who Jimmy Seville was and what he did as a fixer,
as a procurer of children. You know, with this just open satanic you
know persona and relationship that Saval had. There's no way these people didn't know
this. Then you know he's getting these awards. I mean, it's just
insane. And people just simply refuse and won't believe that their leaders are that
corrupt because it would really mean the whole that they've been lied to and they've
been believing a lie, and so they would rather double down on delusions then
simply to admit that they're being lied to and they've been deceived. But I
mean the same people that are on the nightly news the web is of mass
destruction people. I mean, they're lying just as much as these people are
lying, right, So if you think those people are lying, don't you
also think their buddies of the Vatican are lying? Right? Absolutely, And
it's so funny. People like the Stephen Colberts of the world are like the
public figureheads of a Catholic you know, or how how do I promote my
Catholic faith? And again he's a total subverter, total stude for the deep
state of the global you know nothing, he says, you can believe it
even to be his own opinion. Well, he is the Catholic because again,
Catholicism is whatever you want it to be. If you want it to
be skittles and you know, chopping up B A B I s at plan
p A R N T H O O D, and then that's what it
is for you. If you want it to be medieval knights crusading and chopping
off heads, they can be whatever you want. You kind of mentioned it
again, I had a list of topics, but would you mind speaking maybe
a little bit more on on like I'm not too familiar on the erection of
the Vatican Bank. What is the history? How did this thing come about?
You know, I know a little bit about usury and the Mediceese being
really the first force in Western Europe to really okay usury in a real systematic
way. How does this relate to the Vatican Bank? What is you know
some of the background on the Vatican Bank that people would need to know,
all right, So Hoffen also has a book on this about the papal reversal,
a position on usury. So everybody knows for the first thousand years Christianity,
you weren't supposed to do usury, right, So the papacy then makes
changes and sort of oh, well, you can do in this case,
this case, this case. So the Renaissance are of papacy is you're exactly
right where this reversal occurs, and this is really what paves the way for
modern banking. Modern banking couldn't have happened if you hadn't had that medieval power
structure having a shift a position on this stuff. So in many ways,
the modern world is a product of the Vatican. You could say, maybe
not directly, but I mean even even law right legal theory actually goes back
to medieval canon law, uh and the Holy Office. A lot of people
don't know that the Inquisition and the procedural approach of the Inquisition, for example,
had a huge impact on Western legal theory, which I'm not saying that
was about that. Actually there's a lot of good things believed or not in
inquisitional procedure that would go into Western legal theory about the rights of the accused,
all this kind of stuff. So a lot of that is overplayed and
and kind of misunderstood. So but that's a different topic. And when it
comes to legal theory itself or acum monetary theory, yeah, I think that
eventually what happens is that you get the allowance for fiat money, money printing,
all these kinds of which would which would would have been previously seen as
dubious immoral practices in terms of banking, become the norm in the West.
I don't think directly, because I don't think the papers was directly causing that.
But you get the allowance of these things, which opens the pendor's box
is the point. And so eventually, I don't think the Vatican Bank started
as a thing where they were just trying to make money or its like a
It was the institute of you know, religious works. It was just kind
of going to be this thing where that you know, they could promote good
works through money for the Diocese of Rome and the Church Rome. But what
eventually happens, I think is that because there's so much wealth and power that
the Vatican eventually accrues, it's just too much, it's too over the top
that when it becomes eventually this bank that is part of the global usery based
banking scam, is when it really becomes just this nightmare. And this is
where we get the famous Vatican banking scandal, where now it's tied into the
global economy, it's tied into the giant trillion dollar debt based system, it's
tied into the mafia. This is all well documented. It's not a conspiracy
theory. It's a very famous, well known, documented event of the Vatican
bank scandals, and it eventually led to the assassination of multiple people. One
of the famous bishops involved in this is Bishop Marcinkus. Go look it up.
And the famous banker who died, the Vatican banker, Roberto Calvi.
He ends up assassinated by the mafia over this gigantic money laundering scheme. So
we're organized crime the Vatican. They're joined at the hip at this point,
very clearly from the scandal. And even after the Vatican banking scandals, not
like, oh, well, it went away. I mean, there have
been multiple Vatican banking scandals involving money laundering, bribery, theft, deception,
death's assassinations in the last several decades. So it's not like this went away
in the fifty sixty seventies. No, no, no, it's still ongoing.
There have been major Vatican banking scandals in the last couple of years.
And again, the Vatican Bank is not any different than any of the other
international banks. It's one of them. It's tied into the shadow banking structure.
It's just another element of the you know, bast system. And so
the human t R A F F, I, C K, I,
n G. The blackmail that goes on through clerics being compromised, which by
the way wim Hoff covers. I mean that all ties into these banking elite
scandals because it's the banks that run the world. Right, Why the Vatican
is so in favor of the Great Reset because not only are they yeah,
he's a tool of these humanist institution, but they're financially in line and in
lockstep with the Great Reset itself. Oh totally, And it's very obvious.
It's totally evident to the whole world, and everybody knows it. And then
rom mcallochs lie to themselves, Oh but he's not really or oh, I'll
just wait until there's a base pope. You're not going to get a base
pope. Guess what. Francis stacked the cardinals with non based cardinals. Who
do you think the non based cardinals are going to elect a bays pope.
Are you serious? There are no base cardinals, there's no base. They're
not gonna get whoever that black dude from Africa is. And he's a proponent
of Vatican two anyway, So I don't know what people think that cardinal.
What's his face? That black dude? Yeah, so I know that you've
posted recently on some of the what you what's your thoughts on the whole Canadian
thing where they're finding the remains of the of the natives at these Catholic sides.
I've seen some people in an orthosphere post that this was a hoax,
that this was a sort of a political ploy, But I mean, the
Vatican has Cathosism itself has a whole history of killing people pretty ruthlessly. What
are your thoughts on some of the because that's some contemporary news that I don't
find it hard to believe. Obviously, I don't know one certitude, but
I watched two documentaries on it. I watched multiple interviews with people who had
lived in these orphanages in Canada. I think that a lot of them are
telling the truth. And when I compare it to other cases of orphanages that
aren't just about indigenous peoples. I mean, you can go to the orphanages
in Ireland, the ones in Scotland, there's cases a Jersey where I think
the one in Jersey Wash it was where they found you know, like piles
of bones in the corner. There're ben rumors for many many years of again
satanic and occultic practices in these places. So I don't think that's hard to
believe at all. In fact, it's not in print anymore. But William
Kennedy wrote a book back before all this came out in two thousand and three
or four called Lucifer's Lodge, and he was just documenting the cases of this
stuff up until two thousand and three or four. So many many more cases
have come out, and so again it's not just look up the satanic practices
that were going on at the orphanage in Scotland where they admitted it with satanic
Look at how they were renting the boys out in Germany. Admittedly I can't
even say what they were doing in that case. It's so disgusting. So
I don't find it hard to do. I know with the hum certitude that
that that's what they were doing to the indigenous peoples and kind of know,
but I don't find it hard to believe given the other cases that I can
confirm, right absolutely, Yeah, the the and by the way, just
because leftist groups take stories and try to use them, doesn't mean that there's
not some truth to the stories, right absolutely. And the grooming of children,
I mean, this is a this is a known thing. And you
know, even my low Monopolis himself, where did he experience his first homoerotic
relationship well with his priest and and so it's it's it's so out in the
open that it's kind of hard as an Orthodox and I never really turned my
gaze even coming back to christ. Catholicism was always a real difficult pill to
swallow given some of these things that were they're so out in the open.
At this point, I did find the traditionality interesting before really diving into Orthodoxy.
But uh, the child grooming, the pedophilia, it is so so
prevalent and like that, I mean, that's what I'm trying to say is
that the at the organizational institutional level, this is so rampant and so widespread
that it's as if the whole organization is basically an organized crime entity, right,
which that's how I see it. Their bank is used to launder the
money for all their crime. And this is not this is known, right,
So why people want to be in this It baffles me. And I
think people think that, you know, what they read in the church fathers,
or what they read in the forged documents, which you know, the
papacy has relied on countless dozens of forgeries to try to pop up this position
because it was so ahistorical, they had to rely on all these I've got
a list of the forgeries right here. They rely on all these forgeries,
you know, Fords documents to try to prove the papacy. I mean,
you know, if you're not being duped by forgeries, I don't understand why
you would find this institution even convincing or dealing. I mean, it's not
a haven of traditionalism, it's not. It is the revolution itself. Francis
is a revolutionary and when you go into this institution as a traditionally minded person,
uh, Francis doesn't want you there. You're not his. He doesn't
care about you. He wants you to go away. In fact, look
what he just did to all the traads exactly so so that the irony ears
of the Roman Catholics, the traditional Roman Catholics, that get so mad at
us, and really I think that it's just lashing out. They're angry about
their position, their church and really Francis, and a lot of the anger
is directed at us when it's you know, I'm not Francis, I'm not.
I don't. There's no better evangelists for Orthodoxy than pute Francis. Amen
to that. And you almost feel bad because I know, I have some
Catholic friends and they're they're they're you know, they're on the level, they're
based, and they're still struggling with their faith, and it's like I'm always
trying to throw out lures that lead them back to Orthodoxy. And it's like
the the ancestry of their family, their relationship to Orthodoxy. You know how
many generations I mean Catholicism, I know, and and and it's I they
can't get out of the the historiicsity of their family tradition being part of Cathology.
Okay, well that's just an idol. So that's we would all be
idolators if we believe that because our ancestors are all Pagans. But I mean,
that's the only thing I can imagine why what would hold somebody in Catholicism
at this point. There is no logical theological justification for why it'd be the
true church. It has to be some like you said, sort of idolizing
of your family history of this is what you know our granddad did, and
he was such a great guy. It just falls empty, It falls real
empty. Well. The scary part about that, too, is how delusions
work. And the problem is that the more that you buy into and affirmed
delusions, you're not hurting anybody but yourself. I mean, it's not like
you're not getting at me because you stay in Rome almost good dire convinced my
friends become tragile. You're gonna find out firsthand that the trad world is not
what is cracked up to me. And right the nightmare I was, I
spent ten years in that world, So it's it's not it's not. The
grass is not greeners want to try to say if you go to the trad
world. And one thing I found too is that, like you said,
a lot of the times when we talk to people who I'll put it this
way. I've never had a person who left Orthodoxy for Rome have a a
coherent, real conversation with any of us or any any of my friends about
why, in fact what always happens. And there was a couple of people
recently who did this in the last year. I know of two. They
specifically said, I will not speak to you. I don't want anything to
do with you, and I'm not going to talk to you. And it's
like, well, did I do something personally? No, okay, but
what wouldn't you want to at least bounce the ideas off, like you know
what I mean, We're we're at least decent apologists over here, Like,
wouldn't you want to hear some at least good arguments as to why maybe it's
not the best choice. No, I want nothing to do with you.
I'm not going to talk to you. I don't want it. So what
that says to me is that the reasons that they have and in one case,
this one person said, when I prayed, I felt better doing Roman
Cathy prayers. That's not a good argument. Again, Yeah, that is
prelat delusion. Exactly. We're not we don't choose our religion of the basis
of how we feel. I mean, if that was the case, Uh,
well, I got a burning in my bosoone when I prayed, So
I guess I should go to you know of this or that pirle man.
Yeah, so in that idea, like, for example, the gentleman of
your example leaving Orthodoxy not wanting to engage with you because you may sway him
from his decision to go back to Catholicism, and then even basing it in
emotional I mean, Saint Ignatius, his whole prayer is about fantastic imaginating places
for prayer and devotion and then immense Pietism in the way that you feel and
get an Orthodoxy we say, well watch out with being way too emotional and
way too in your imagination. Well, one of these people was a girl,
so that's actually why she wanted to go on that route. Another person
was a dude who specifically would not have anything to do or discuss anything with
any of us. And again, I mean, that's your prerogative, but
it's not really going to hurt my feelings if you don't like me. But
again, I would just I would think that if I was wanting to make
a decision like that, I would want to know the best case and the
best arguments, irregardless of the person giving the argument right, right? What
the other position was right? So what's the best arguments for Orthodoxy? What
was the best argument Fromtholicism? I want to see both of those right.
And that's, you know, really what I tried to do. That's the
approach. I took many, many years looking at both of those arguments,
both those systems, and not just the arguments. But like, where have
both of these churches gone? Right? Where did Rome go in the last
fifteen years? Where did Orthodoxy go in the last fifteen years? Right?
No, And that has to do with the pursuit of an honest pursuit and
sincere pursuit of truth, of which is the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the
logos Jesus Christ is the truth. Truth is who, not of what.
And so my own journey back to Orthodoxy deeply in the psychedelics, deeply into
the drug scene. But it was I was honestly thought it was true,
and I was open to change my mind, and I'm learning, I'm taking
a new information, and that journey leads me to orthodox and led me to
your content of which you are on the same path, and that you are
apologetic. So if I am able to do anything positive with my channel,
it's trying to put out truthful things in the pursuit of truth, no matter
whoever it comes from or who it comes from, and then take that and
navigate based on that information. And I feel like so many of the people
I know that are still stuck in Roman Catholicism. They can see so much
of what's going on because their trad values. Yet then when it comes back
to the church and the absolute degeneracy of their institution, they don't want to
look at it. And to me, that's in negating of Christ himself and
the pursuit of truth, which is why then the Church is the way it
is. The Catholic Church is the way it is because of that. Well
one of the other tried myths that needs to be exploded, which is another
kind of weird delusion, as a lot of Roman Catholics think that they can
have their own Catholicism regardless and irrespective of Rome. I don't care what Francis
does. I'm gonna go Latin mass I'm gonna do my trad stuff. That's
my religigon. But that's not how the Roman Catholic system works. You don't
get to erect your mental Roman Catholicism that has nothing to do with Rome.
Because the fundamental nature of the Church in the Roman Catholic system is defined at
Vatican One and is essentially constituted by Rome and the living successor in Rome.
You have no right, no prerogative. Fact, you're condemned for saying that
I'm going to have my Roman Catholicism, irregardless, with nothing to do with
the guy in Rome. That's totally contrary. It's condemned in fact. In
terms of Vatican One, Vatican One says that the Roman Catholic Institution, as
a visible institution, can never lose its constituent elements and parts, and some
of those are things like international visibility. It's a visible international institution. It
has a living head and successor and always will until the return of Christ.
So that doesn't mean that there's not periods of vacancy when they're going to elect
a pope, but it's saying that there will never cease to be a living,
visible successor to the office of Peter under that terrorism of the Holy Spirit
until the end of the world. This is all laid out very clearly in
Vatican One. Everybody who's a Roman Catholic who doesn't know this should go print
out and Rea Vatican One, because I'm serious. So many people in my
experience in the Roman Catholic world, they're just ignorant of what vac In one
actually says, and they think that they can do this like Protestant move where
they have a Roman Catholicism of their own in their head that's not connected to
Rome. That doesn't work, that doesn't exist. You don't get to have
an historian, invisible church version of Catholicism that's not based on the living successor
to Peter in Rome. That's what Vatican one says, right right, And
that's what they all want to do. They're all like, I don't care
what's happened in Rome for the last seventy years. I'm going to do my
thing. Okay, But that's not Roman Catholicism. That's something thing else.
And that's the problem with you know, the whole SSPX and and a lot
of those people in the cares and the trads too. Yeah, now their
their mass is being uh you know, outlawed within this well, they're all
saying, I don't care what Rome does. It doesn't work like that.
Don't you know that Vatican One says that you have to adhere to the jurisdictional,
canonical and UH judgments of Rome, so that, in other words,
when the when the Holy See pronounces a judgment on this or that liturgical canonical
issue, you can't reject it. You might believe it's wrong, but you
can't reject it. You don't have the authority to reject the juridical decisions of
the Roman See. That's actually a condemned proposition because at the time that that
was added to Vatican One, it's it's part of Vatican one. If you
read densing here. There were theologians, for example, at the time they
were saying, oh, okay, well, I will accept uh the papal
teaching only in so far as it's ex cathedral. And so there was some
theologians who said at that time that means I don't have to accept uh,
like if the Holy Office censures me for teaching something like if they condemn me
or excommunicate me, or then I don't have to accept those things because they're
not ex cathedral. That is condemned, and it specifically say it's that you
must follow the Roman See in all of her offices and decisions, including the
Holy Office, which is an extension of the of the Roman See. So
I mean you could see the like the new the the Sophistry and Casustrie that
was being used or people trying to get around it. Well, I don't
have to accept, like, you know, the Holy Office because that's not
the Pope. Well it specifically says that it's an extension of the Pope.
You do have to accept it, right, because it's an action of the
representatives of the Holy See. So this is all just just gains and nonsense
that the trads do and play to try to get around these problems. Yeah,
my favorite, one of my favorite ones is the sort of low IQ
rebote, And I saw Nick Quintez said this to you and your debate with
him as well, we're the true church because we were founded by Peter.
And it's like, dude, did you not read the Book of Acts,
Like there's multiple churches you know, for example, I'm in the Antiochia in
Churt Antioch indiok was founded by Peter and Paul way before Rome. So what
exactly you talking about. I mean, earlier Ecuminical councils state that every church
that has absolute succession is as fully Catholic as any other church. So this
is ridiculous, right, Well, when you're talking about how they almost harm
themselves in uh in the sort of delusion mouse traps mazes that the Catholics go
through. I mean, now we're seeing the Vatican promote the JAB passport and
get getting the stabbies, and now this, I mean, what better example
of the fact that he is a tool of the geopolitical powers that we talked
about than that. Exactly, you can't even go so based on the presupposition,
say I am a Roman Catholic, Well, I definitely want to go
to the Vatican, and I want to, but I'm against abortion. So
because I'm against abortion, I'm not going to put something with fetal cells inside
of me. But then the Vatican itself won't even let you in without your
green pass What are you talking about? Oh, and by the way,
I found there used to be some things on the Vatican website several years ago,
maybe five ten years ago that actually condemned using those cell lines in stabbies.
And it's apparently no longer the case that was under Benedict. So again,
it's funny how things just can reverse, right, like it's a sin
to do it like ten years ago. Oh now it's cool, it's all
good doing. Right. And I saw in certain parts of the US that
Catholic bishops were preventing priests from giving religious exemptions from the stabbes. Yeah,
and if any trad wants to fuss about the Orthodox world, I would totally
agree with you. It's wrong. Whether it's in the world or the Orthodoxy,
it's wrong. But but the point is that the nature of the Roman
Catholic system is not the system that is Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy doesn't have Bartholow you
as a pope, right, He's not like there have been countless time,
not countless, but many times when the patriarch concept to noble was a total
heretic. And everybody knows this his famous instances in the history of the church,
many of them persecuted people who eventually became saints. Right, So we're
not saying that a patriarch, any of these bishops can't apostatize. In fact,
that's our whole point. Any patriarchy, any bishop, can apostatize,
including the one in Rome, and he has clearly and so along what we're
seeing now within Catholicism is I forget what's the priest's name, and he's got
like a he's online on Twitter and stuff something Martin, and he promotes a
lot of the homosexual stuff. You know his name, Oh the famous Jesuit.
Yeah, yeah that now I know with some of the more trad bishops
and priests and Catholicism are really upset because Francis sent him a glowing letter about
his work regarding same sex unions and marginalized communities, that you're really seeing a
real push within Catholicism for same sex unions. Well, there was an issue
a few months ago where Francis in a video talked about how it might be
advantageous to have the legalization of the civil unions too. What was his reason
for it being advantageous just to get more people or what? No, I
think it was throwing I mean my analysis that he was throwing a bone either
to that community, to the left, or he was testing the waters to
see how far he could go to advance the revolution right, which in my
mind it is the state church and so I mean all of the Yeah,
I mean all of the their apologists were all up in arms and going having
a hissy fit over it. And it's like, I mean, what about
all the other stuff he does? Like he I mean he goes to mosques
and prays towards Mecca. I mean that's an action of apostasy in your own
theology and canon law. But they don't care. They don't care, Right,
that's what they just say. I don't care what he does. I
don't care what he does. It doesn't matter. I don't have to listen
to Rome. It's all. It's it's you notice how arbitrary it is as
to what's infallible and binding and what's not. It's just whatever the Romancolic needs
at the moment. Right, Oh, it's not, that's not infallible.
It doesn't matter, it's not, it's not ex Cathedral, and then when
he needs it to be it is. This is again the irony is that
there is no actual list for them as to what is dog man infallible and
what isn't. So the very thing that they always try to roll out is
like their trump card, their knockdown argument. Right, you don't have a
way to know dogma. Okay, where is the list of the Roman Catholic
dogmas. They don't have one. There is no infallible list. Yeah.
The relativism, as you're talking about, you're started sort of picking and choosing
and finding things that are useful at certain points. I mean, to me,
this is the spirit of the anti Christ. If Christ is the truth,
the fact that the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church is filled with all
this really promoting the relativism is the negation of Christ himself, the negation of
the validity and veracity of Christianity. Yeah, it can't be apostasy in nineteen
twenty eight to have inter religious prayer meetings and interfaith prayer meetings in nineteen sixty
five. That be the work of the Holy Spirit to do it right.
It's just I can't. That's not possible. And they always say, give
us one example of the contradiction CHALVI. You there's one right there, which
insane. By the way, Roman Catholics they really should read Mortalium Anemos because
the whole encyclical is a virulent, I mean, just rabid refutation and rejection
of Ecumenism in all forms. And then it's night and day, the very
opposite of what is in Vatican Two, in the Vatican two documents and in
the actions of the Vatican two papacy. Particularly. I'm sure you've seen the
Assezi Gatherings. Are you familiar with us? Yeah? Okay, So in
nineteen eighty six and then again on something like nineteen ninety two or I don't
know, someone in the nineties, they gathered together all the world religions and
have these big, famous prayer meetings. And you'll notice it's their famous pictures
where John Paul the Second is of their holding a plant or something, and
he's up there with the Buddhists and with the Hindus and the Giantess and there's
even an Orthodox bishop there supposedly. And it's known as the Assezi Gatherings.
And they famously went into the Saint Francis Cathedral and in Italy and Asizi,
and they draped blankets over all the crucifixes, so it's to not offend the
world religions. They allowed voodoo practitioners to go into one of the rooms,
they allowed all the other religions to go into the other rooms, and they
had a World religion prayer Day where everyone prayed to their gods. It's very
famous incidents, but I don't know why every Roman Catholic should know about this.
And they even placed a little Buddha up on the altar to appease the
Buddhists. And I mean, if that's if you can't see, if you
don't have the spiritual discernment, not telling you, but people in general,
if people in general don't have the spiritual discernment to see that that is apostasy,
then I don't know what to tell you. And you're in delusion,
and you know it's just going to have to be God waking them up out
of that state, because I mean, that's just a fundamentally impossible scenario to
have all of the world religion. In fact, I mean it was,
it was so bad Benedict had to do like damage control for it. Wow
yeo. I mean, which you see now? The Pacha Mama veneration,
uh, patcha Mama is just an a logical extension of Vatican two in the
a Szi gathering, and Pacha Mama as a what do you want to call
it, spiritual entity is really just a sort of substantiation of the global warming
cult in this new veneration of nature itself. I mean, Patcha Mama is
a human sacrifice deity right in the Amazon. It related back to this sort
of which is exactly one we're undergoing at a global level right now, is
a sort of human sacrificial absolutely. And let's make a point about this that
relates earlier to the sleight of hand. And you mentioned the extreme Marion dogmas
in Rome. Uh. One of the justifications that these people tried to give
for Pascha Mama was precisely that, well, if they're as indigenous people honoring
the Great Mother, that's no different than Mary. Really, so Mary is
literally the equivalent of a human sacrifice deity. In other words, is remember
what we were saying earlier about how the word God is not a rigid designator.
Right. But this is the syncretistic approach of Roman Catholicism, you know,
this is what you see in Santaia, right, which is, oh,
well, convert the masses by just saying that Mary is your Patchemama.
That's not real conversion. That's not what Christianity is. Christianity is not taking
all the world religion symbols and then just saying that while we're all talking about
the same thing, bro, It's all the same. No, Mary is
not a human sacrifice deity out of the Amazon. They're not the same thing.
So the fact that the word great mother or mother is used does not
mean it's the same reference. This is so stupid, right, absolutely,
I'm not joking. That's that's literally the justification that they tried to use.
I tried to say, well, it's a great mother, we have the
Mother of God, the Tan Tacos, the same thing, bro. But
it's just like what you're talking about with at the beginning of the stream,
with what they do with the concept of God in the New One World religion.
It's it's the same inflation of concepts and categories. It's a word concept
fallacy, it's a sleight of hand. It is intimidating. The stupid thing
about this is that it doesn't produce converts. It produces aberrations and aberrant forms
of the religion that lead to the very things that are the problem that we're
talking about, right, which I believe is entirely intentional. You know,
Yeah, it's it's a it's a tool for religious engineering ultimately from the vantage
point of the elite, right, Yeah, absolutely, absolutely, and so
the Pacha Mama, I mean it, it's getting Catholic in the Catholic world,
whether they're conscientious of it or not. To again subtly get scooped up
into the green religion. Well, yeah, exactly. So remember the word
catholic. So if you read the the in the first thousand years, when
you're reading the Church fathers and the Saints and the councils, Catholic means the
fullness of the faith. Right, it does not equate to a number of
people that believe it. That might be part of it, at least when
the Church expands throughout the Empire. And yeah, there's a lot of people
believe it. But the Catholic Church at various times, even in the Imperium,
was very small. In the Arian Crisis, the number of true Catholics
was very small in the days of Saint Maximus. Saint Maximus famously said I
am a Catholic and will always remain a Catholic. Even if the number of
Catholics is reduced to five people. He said, I'll still be the I'll
still be one of the Catholics. And he's expressing the point that Catholic means
fullness, does not equate to first and foremost numbers of people. And this
is another silly argument of the Roman Catholics, and they try to equate the
two and oh see where the true churches we have the most people. And
that's what Catholic means. It means universal. And they're doing the same thing
with universal, where they say, oh see, universal means everything, and
so every religion is really, you see, just part of the consenter circles
of Catholicism. Right, absolutely, no, that's not what Catholic means.
In the Creed, one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church has nothing to do with
all the religions being on a scale of being. No. In fact,
the Creeds emphatically stating that this is the single one true faith, that path
and purpose exactly. It's not ecumenical whatsoever or perennialistic whatsoever. It would be
like saying it'd be like saying, well, we're all acumenists because they were
ecumenical councils, and that's the same word. I think, how stupid that
is, Like as of a humanism equates to ecumenical council It's totally different meanings.
Dude, Oh my gosh, it reminds me of the people that you
look at English words and come up with this whole uh thing theology of how
all the you know, all the religions are are star warship astro theology and
they kind of mix and do they try to do this is a classic Jordan
Maxwell move right drdon Maxwell does this where he says Solomon, right, Solomon
was actually soul home and on, and it's like, dude, the name
Solomon Shalom has nothing to do with those other languages, right, that game's
only played in English. And that's what I think for this, it's so
stupid, so low iq. But ironically what we're talking about is almost like
another version of this, like really low iq uh slide. It's a sleight
of hand, right. Imagine me trying to convert people being like, do
you believe in God? I believe in God? Do we well believe in
God? He's like, He's like, well, but I'm a voodoo practitioner.
Yeah, but we both agree that we believe in God, so we're
in the same religion. See, now you have to come to church with
me? Like, who would buy that? It's just such a stupid right,
That's what's going on well, and whether it be the Pacha Mama worship,
whether it be the marinology, or the sort of sympathetic yearnings it has
towards the global warming, global climate chain, whatever they want to call it.
Now you see the feminization of the church itself and how it's now wanting
to even ordain women as priests, and that Orthodoxy really is the last vestige
of any sort of patriarchal force within Christianity because the consumerism. Yeah, we
may have some good Protestants or Evangelicals that are resistant things, but Protestantism itself,
especially the way it exists in America, is replete with consumerism, you
know, self worship, all these different things that doesn't masculinize a person.
There's no tradition there. Orthodoxy is the last vestige of a sort of masculinized
Christianity. And and even though the trad Catholics want to talk about their crusaders
of you know, the the the eleventh century or whatever, it's it's a
feminized institution at this point because it's so worldly, it's so in step with
the progressive yearnings of the world. Right now, what what are your thoughts
on that? Well? And Also you can see that in the fact that
that older Crusader ethos, which itself is heterodox, but that older idea of
Crusaders is actually given way to the obsessive Marian apparition reliance. And so the
modern manifestations of Roman Falsism are almost completely dominated by Marianism, Marion dogmas,
and excessive uh Marian worship. Really, and I don't think anybody, I
mean, I again, my years in the trad world, I met more
trads that could tell you about you know, Fatima and magic gory and all
this and the nonsense. Then could tell you what's in scripture. They probably
couldn't tell you the tank commandments, but they could tell you everything about you
know, Fatoma and Megigorian, all this nonsense. They don't know what's in
the Book of John, but they know about so what. That's a clear
example to me, right of this is an aberrant, you know, form
of delusion. Really, I mean, the the the saints that have really
been stressed in the last few hundred years of the Roman Callolic Church are especially
in the last few decades, saints that are confirmations of Vatican two. Right,
I mean, we've got Jose Maria Scrieva. We've got, you know,
Mother Terisa. I mean, these are expressions of the Vatican two religion
and worldview, and even before them, you have these really historyonic manifestations of
of the of the feminine, which from the from the Orthodox perspective. This
is a really important point because we think the experience of the saints is unified.
There's not twenty hundred different, thousands mystical paths that everybody takes that involves
all this nonsense of like, you know, Jesus giving people spiritual orgasms.
I'm not joking, by the way, that's real thing with Teresa Avila.
You know, Jesus floating around in the host and telling Fostina Kowalska that she's
the holiest and most best known in the world and their bff and boyfriend girlfriend.
I'm not joking. That's what's in her revelations. All this nonsense that,
by the way, you have to accept. If you're Catholic, you
believe those things. You know, Jesus, Jesus carving his name into the
chest of various saints, and you know, Jesus giving a circumcision ring to
one of the women's saints. I mean it's just nonsense. It's ridiculous.
It's actually delusion from the Orthodox perspective, because for us, the experience of
the saints is all the same. It is a unified experience of the divine
light, not in the ascaton, in this life. So for us,
Moses, Paul, Basil, Palamos, they all have the same experience.
There's no such thing as these crazy things, right, okay, right,
which gives it a sort of real unity. And that's what's the funny thing
about the when you look at Catholicism, is they have this unity in the
papacy, or at least submission to the papers. It's a pseudo unity,
y pseudo unity, because inside it they have so much diversity and contention and
conflict and literally contradictions amongst each other. It makes no sense. It's just
that we all submit to the papacy. Yeah, there's not a unified faith
at all. No, the principle of unity is just the verbal accession and
knowledge acknowledgment mentally verbally of the pope. That's it. Uh. Literally,
everything else is all all over the place. I can't help too. One
of the things I've been thinking about is is it feels like Catholicism is magical,
like they sort of promote a magical theology and when you look at again,
I don't know the technical term, but their concepts of grace. So
the pope has grace then because of his grace. Oh, it is in
fact, it is a technology. The ex operary operato doctrine is a magical
doctrine because in the Roman Catholic system, you can be ordained a priest literally
the next day become a Satanist, and you can still confect the Eucharus for
the rest of your life. They literally think that that's the power of the
priesthood, which is just preposterous. And the Orthodox to you that you know,
if you're outside the church, you can't confect the Eucharist, right,
I mean, an aposta can't confect the ucharsus. You can't even confect the
Ucharus without the approval of a canonical bishop. So the idea of this whole,
you know, it's just ridiculous, right, And they can do like
the transubstantiation. The fact that they can do things on behalf of the people.
I've been trying to this is why Satanists and occultists actually try to go
to Roman Catholic they try to get I'm not joking, and they try to
get that priest to ordination because they think that it is a magical power.
Well, I think the Catholics as no institution presented as a magical power.
Well, it's like a technology, right, so you control you know what,
God, You can make God come into the bread and the wine,
and you don't even have to have the faith, right, I mean literally,
you can be a Satanist the day you get ordained, and you can
still confect the Uchers, which is just for which makes you think. And
what I mean by it as magical is that when we perform a liturgical service
as Orthodox, we ask the Holy Spirit through a mystery, to come and
sanctify these gifts on behalf of everybody. The priest is just the head of
the body of Christ, the parishioners. Where in Catholicism, you know,
it's it's that the priest does it. He does it on your behalf because
you know you as a little bit lower than he is in the world of
grace and relationship to God, that he needs to do this for you.
That there's this, as you say, had a sort of an authority.
There's this technique, whether he believes in it or not, he has this
ability to magically transform the unleavened bread by the way, which I find demonic
in itself. I mean, if Christ's body rose from the dead, and
the Eucharist is how we participate in the salvific work of Christ, then the
bread obviously has to be risen to some degree because his body roads. That's
the theology to make it unleavened bread. They want to say that they're doing
it because the Old test or whatnot. It conflates New Testament theology makes no
sense. And yeah, it's it's a very if you eave Metropolitan seraphrom Mapereus's
list, he lists one of these lists that has one of the many things
that can never be accepted by the Orthodox because it's not Patristic. I mean
Rome. I mean, there's all kinds of things like this, like forbidding
children to have communion. The whole ancient Church did that, but it's i
mean, the only only the Orthodox Church maintains that. So uh, I
mean these are clear sign of you know, who the actual consistent Patristic church
is. And uh, you know, it's just the degree of deception and
coping and you know, mental gymnastics that that they have to go to to
try to make that system work is I think what drives those people kind of
crazy. A lot of them become alcoholics, a lot of them are very
depressed, a lot of them become atheists. They just give up because that
system doesn't get you anywhere. And and it's because the system itself is a
problem. Right, It makes total sense, makes total sense, just like
this, just like Protestanism or evangelicalism, just different problems. Right. No,
I totally agree. I totally agree. I'm gonna have to go pretty
soon, but we have Do you have time for a few super chats?
Yea, sure, okay, all right, thank you so much for for
stopping here and having this conversation. I'm sure. Well, by the way,
I did have a bunch of like the more of the historical stuff that
maybe we could a separate one on that kind of stuff. But like Edward
Denny's Papalism, I this is a thousand page book. Ab Geta's book The
Papacy is kind of a classic on this too, and so I wouldn't mind.
You know, maybe down the road we can do another discussion where we
get into like the historical examples, you know, the canon law I've got
in your I sent you that that first link. There is a list of
the canons you know that are contrary to Let me show a Vatican one.
So maybe we can do a show on that stuff. That would be great.
First super Chat comes from Traditional Culture Preservation Society. There was in fifteen
dollars and says hello, I have been a fan and follower for a while.
I'd be interested in interviewing you on my channel about anthropology sometime in the
near future. Is that okay with you? That's definitely okay with me.
Thank you so much, Traditional Culture Preservation Society. Send me an email at
Church of the Eternal Logos at gmail dot com and we can definitely set something
up. Thank you so much for yourt oh our good, our good ortho.
Buddy Chase Haggard throws into super Chat and says, the Dynamic Diva duo
at it again. Thanks for all your hard work. Well, thank you,
Chase. I know he's a mod in your discord. Brother the Tristan
and nephew to Merril Haggard. Orthodoxy Chloroquin throws into super Chat and says,
how are we to understand Christ's final judgment of the wicked when he says,
quote depart from me, ye accursed into the fire unquote, et cetera.
How does this square with eternal torment being an undesired experience of God's uncreated energies
when he said depart? All right, so it's not a spatio temporal thing.
You can't get away from God in terms of space. It's not like
there's a place where he's not. So what is not there is the positive
experience of God. What is there is the ill experience of go. So
this is outline. You just go read Saint Maximus on it. He covers
it in detail, ever ill being, ever well being there you go.
Thank you Orthodox of Chlora Quinn for your super chat. I greatly appreciate,
appreciate your support, brother Eric. Breakbill throws in a super chat and says,
congrats on reaching nine thousand subs. Well, thank you very much,
Eric, I appreciate that slow and steady. Stevie throws into super chat and
says, are Jay and David aware of the ABBA return and their upcoming quote
magical space circus unquote virtual concert. It's awfully convenient timing. No I'm not
familiar you. No, I'll follow boomer disco bands. But that's pretty cool
to hear about. I'll check it out. Thank you so much Stevie for
the support. The Green Feathers throws into super Chat and says, thanks for
another great stream. Well, thank you Green Feathers for all your support.
I really appreciate it. Orthodox of Chlora Quinn throws in a two parter.
Okay, so we got two part super chat here. First part is Roman
Catholicism is really nothing more than papillolatry, or I guess, the idolatry of
the infallible man enthroned in Vatican City. The papacy has followed Lucifer's proud fall
from grace by saying quote, I will place my throne over the bishops of
the Church. True, I shall be as God on earth unquote. Instead
of being the first among equals, the papacy has unwittingly become the first among
many forerunners for anti Christ. Great show, gentlemen, thanks for all you
do in God bless thanks Orthodoxic chloroquin, great comment, great super chat,
Thank you for your support. Brother Links throws into super Chat and says,
Jay go into spurgatory. All right, Um, I've paid all my sperg
indulgences, so I'm out of it. What a relief. Panoat throws into
super Chat and says to Joseph Ferrell in God History and Dialectic Volume three,
calls the post schism Western concept of God the chameleon godhead, which lines up
perfectly with the manifold confused absolute divine simple spawns. Yeah. And also,
I mean, you know, Orthodox Faith and Life and Christ by Saint Joseph
Papovitch is really just I mean, in multiple chapters making the points that David
and I made tonight. I haven't read that book. It's a musteret Mattheos
Salt the Gang throws into super Chat and says, Greeting's brothers, Jay,
may I play, please be readmitted to the discord. God bless you both.
So I don't know. So we have a whole bunch of mods.
We had a bad mod about six months ago who was intentionally comes subverting and
deleting people in like a lot of people to cause problems. So we don't
have that mod anymore. So I don't know if he did that, or
who did that, or what. But I don't really handle the modding anymore,
so I don't he'p always asked me to do this, but I don't
even know, so I don't know. All right, Well, Chase is
still a mod in your discord, right, Yes, Chase can. Yeah,
so Chase, if you're available, maybe go back and forth with Mattheossault
the Gang and see if maybe that situation can be remedied. Next super Chat
comes from Storm the Cat and says, Hi, dph and J. If
Protestants believe in the rapture will happen before the Anti Christ comes, does that
mean that they will be tricked and they will worship the Antichrist? I like
both of your channels, please pray for me and my family. Interesting question,
I mean, well, I mean, I guess if we're in the
end times, they might end up tricked and they might not believe when there's
no rapture. But I don't know for positive that we are in the end
times. But if we are, ye, so yeah, so obviously we
don't believe in the rapture. I would say just that doctrine itself is probably
a spirit of the Antichrist, so it's true to some degree. Next super
check comes from Rich, he says, great stream, I still share the
quote proving God to an atheist video all the time to introduce people to tag
Jay. Do you still plan on making a quick response video directly calling out
Lofton? No, the reason we didn't do that is because right after that
is when Trent wanted to do the debate. And Trent is just obviously a
much more quality He's actually a quality opponent and a person that you know,
I have actual respect for. So Trent is somebody that we want to focus
on. I don't think that Lofton is even worth anybody's time, really agreed.
Tatiana throws into super and say, has been so long since I caught
a live stream? God bless you brothers in Christ. Well, thank you
so much, Tatiana, God bless you and your family. Next super Chat
comes from James and he says, why did Patriarch Krill write the forward to
Pope Francis's book called Quote Our Mother Earth and exchange of quote gifts and make
the Havana declaration with Francis as well? I'm not familiar with those things,
so feel free. Yeah, I don't know about the forward to the book.
I would disagree with that, I don't know that writing the forward necessarily
makes your hair toake. If he's affirming the climate change stuff, I would
say that's pretty pretty bad news. And I don't agree with what is in
the Havanah statement either. Yeah, I have no idea, but thank James,
thank you for that. No. So I think people think too that
like if an Orthodox bishop does something bad, then it's the same thing as
what happens with the pope does. But I mean, I don't think people
grasp that the Orthodox Church is decentralized, right, So I'm not like immediately
destroyed because a patriarch or a metropolitan or a bishop does something a bat or
evil. That's not how our church works. It's a synodal church, so
there's synods and it's governed to notally. And when there's a synod that you
know, deals with those kinds of scandals or issues, then it's dealt with
right. So if there are and there are right, there's there's canonical procedures
for these kinds of things. So yeah, I mean, again, I
don't know where these people get the idea that I mean that half of the
Orthodox world hates me. I'm not that the whole Orthodox world even knows who
I am. And I'm saying that in America, there's a large percentage of
those people that can't stand me, dislike me, would like to, you
know, see me not talking about Orthodoxy or whatever. But that doesn't do
what I conclude from that old I guess Orthodoxy is not true because many of
these people don't like me, right, or in other words, the truth
or falsity of the system is not going to be dependent on within a decentralized
system, this or that bishop doing this or that wrong. The difference between
what we are arguing and the Roman system is that it's not a decentralized system.
It's a system that hinges on what the guy in Rome does. My
system doesn't hinge on what Carol does, right, exactly. Well, most
people just have no idea of what orthodox ecclesiology is, and like, right,
they think it's just like the pope and like if the patriarch of Moscow
does something bad, then the whole system falls apart. Like that, it's
not a papal system, dude, or maybe they come from the Baptist you
know, well, you know, minister so and so is in charge of
the church. It must just again they extrapolate the Catholic ecclesiology to you know,
some Protestant form where there's always a single person in charge. There is
no person in charge at Christ. The priest of priests. He's the only
person in charge of the church. He's the head of the church. That's
why we have no vicar is. This is a good thing. This is
a firewall because the whole system can't be tainted and disrupted and ruined by one
dude, and that Rome can't. Right. So if an Orthodox bishop or
a priest that I'm under goes into heresy, the great thing about multiple jurisdictions
is that Lord willing, I can find another one. Right, is human
milk Vegan throws into superchat with no comment, Thank you very much? Is
human milk Vegan for the support and orthodox of Chloroquin throws in another super chat,
thank you very much, brother, And he says when Catholicism supposedly says
quote I believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church unquote, what it really
means is I believe in one supreme, infallible and Roman pontiff unquote extra papum
nola sulis Catholicism is an exact ecclesiological heresy absolutely, and that does all the
super chats. So brother, thank you so much for coming on and sharing
your wisdom with us. I guarantee you, uh, this will be insightful
for a lot of people who watch. This covered a lot of ground and
hit on a lot of the heresies and the evils. Well, we need
to also get into, you know, the history and the cannons, because
I'm sure I can already tell whether on mcallis you're gonna tell you oh,
they didn't even talk about the history. What about the quotes and the councils
to say, hope superre I'm ready to deal with those in any But by
the way, again, for the people who want a really detailed account of
those things, Ubi Petris has done multiple videos. We've been you know,
promoting and working with UBI for uh, you know, over a year,
and and go over to ubi's channel and you can find specific places all of
those things that are addressed, you know, all the stuff that lofton that
a Barro brings up, they're all addressed in detail in Ubie's videos. And
so I'm happy to also address them, which you know, I will get
to you know, in the future when we do a you know, discussion
on Denny's book. But whatever, Amen to that man. Thank you so
much for all the work you do. You put out so much content,
whether it be info Wars, your channel, rock fin your website, hustling,
hustling, and I'm trying to work in a similar manner, so I
definitely respect the hustle. Most people don't realize how much effort it takes to
create content and do this type of work. Yeah, you get to make
your own schedule, but it's not easy. You work literally way more than
a nine to five. It's all day long. And so thank you man
for so much of what you do. Everything you do. Shout out to
Jamie, Thank you both for all your guys's work. Thanks for coming on
and I really appreciate everything. Is anything you'd like to say before hopping off
here? No, thank you, glad to be here. Congrats on nine
k and hopefully, you know, if everybody would, if you're not subscribed
to me, coming on my channel too, and I'll be you know,
hopefully we can hit the hundred k pretty soon. I get that give you
little play button thing. There you go. Yeah, I'll have your channel
in the description, but I'm sure everybody knows your stuff. I'm sure almost
everybody in this live chat's probably subscribed to both of us. So anyways,
man, thank you so much. Shout out to Mikhail, King of Kings,
throws in a super chat right at the end with no comment. Thank
you very very much.