Speaker 1: Let's start the stream and see if this works.
Speaker 2: Okay, fingers questa, okay, all.
Speaker 1: Right, welcome, welcome, welcome. Can everybody in the chat hear me?
Speaker 1: Is that you play music?
Speaker 3: Alightter just pus this the ad Cauzipito started. Okay, uh yeah,
Speaker 3: and can people give me as well? All right? Kay?
Speaker 1: Can you guys hear uh snack? Hold on, there's another
Speaker 1: computer that's playing. Let me turn that off.
Speaker 4: Okay, all right, we should be good.
Speaker 1: We're going, we're rolling sounds good yep, everybody lot and clear,
Speaker 1: all right, welcome, this is uh we've been wanting to
Speaker 1: do this show for a while.
Speaker 5: The stream and I have with me.
Speaker 1: Snack, one of our French ortho bros. I've just been
Speaker 1: here reading my copy of how to Mind Control Snack
Speaker 1: by Ignacious Loyal.
Speaker 5: Snack there.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, yeah that I had the.
Speaker 1: Spiritual exercises and I'm going to figure out how to
Speaker 1: mind control you with the key phrases and words.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Okay, what's up man? How are you?
Speaker 3: I'm quite right? Yeah, it's very good being here. I
Speaker 3: want to thank everybody.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a pre sip gang and all the theres
Speaker 3: a French team because we've been working on a lot
Speaker 3: of stuff and it's good that, you know, especially having
Speaker 3: these kind of sources that are not available for there's
Speaker 3: a you know, English speaking public.
Speaker 1: So hold on, So let's tell everybody what you do
Speaker 1: real quick and and and just kind of lay that
Speaker 1: out there that you you try to translate a lot
Speaker 1: of these French sources that are not in English, right,
Speaker 1: is that what you're up to?
Speaker 3: Okay? So I'm part of a collective, Like basically we
Speaker 3: have a server, website, YouTube channel, we are supervised by
Speaker 3: a deacon that we are French, a lot of French
Speaker 3: converts and so on, and and all collective is about,
Speaker 3: you know, trying to get out sources, easy apologetics and
Speaker 3: new stuff, not not only know translating, but usually bringing
Speaker 3: out the ideas and sharing. And we've been involved with
Speaker 3: with yeah, some of the people that follow you as well,
Speaker 3: the Precept Gang and and we have a yeah on
Speaker 3: server or on thing.
Speaker 5: Yeah oh cool?
Speaker 1: Okay, So and I've got the links in the description
Speaker 1: to the French Orthobro discord to your YouTube channel and
Speaker 1: then if they want to follow you on Twitter. So
Speaker 1: everybody's got that information and we'll touch on that again
Speaker 1: real quick, I want to make a point about what's
Speaker 1: coming on YouTube. There's going to be a lot of
Speaker 1: changes to YouTube, particularly in January, so we want to
Speaker 1: be prepared for that. I think Jay's Analysis can weather
Speaker 1: this storm. But basically what's going to happen is that
Speaker 1: the normal ad revenue is going to kind of go
Speaker 1: away because they're going to implement changes that have to
Speaker 1: do with child protection laws in the FTC and this
Speaker 1: is going to affect a lot of gaming channels, but
Speaker 1: they're going to kind of force everybody who has a
Speaker 1: YouTube channel I think January to choose whether their content
Speaker 1: is for kids or not, and if it's not, then
Speaker 1: the demonetization is going to be a lot more severe.
Speaker 1: So it's not going to hurt super chats I don't
Speaker 1: think at this point, which is you know, we do
Speaker 1: well with that here and it's not going to hurt
Speaker 1: channel subscription. So if you want to support Jays Analysis
Speaker 1: on YouTube, you can join the channel subscription button there
Speaker 1: and that lets you get access to the Jason Analysis material.
Speaker 5: And I don't think it's going to affect super chats
Speaker 5: as of yet.
Speaker 1: So those are the two ways that you can continue
Speaker 1: on YouTube to support but the viewership and the memberships
Speaker 1: are not memberships, but the new subscribers to Jasonnalysis just
Speaker 1: following the channel.
Speaker 5: This has affected everybody.
Speaker 1: So in the last two weeks, what they've done with
Speaker 1: the sub button, this has affected everybody. So there's a
Speaker 1: lot of big changes coming and I think a lot
Speaker 1: of people's subscribers are down or flattened out for the
Speaker 1: last two weeks. I don't think hopefully that's not going
Speaker 1: to continue for forever. But there's big changes coming to
Speaker 1: YouTube and it's affecting you know, channels that if this
Speaker 1: is part of.
Speaker 5: How you make a living.
Speaker 1: So hopefully we can weather the storm in terms of
Speaker 1: the channel memberships where you can join or you can
Speaker 1: always subscribe to jays Analysis or jason Alysis, or you
Speaker 1: can hit us up with super Jazz anyway. So I
Speaker 1: needed to make that clear because I've been researching that
Speaker 1: today so.
Speaker 5: Excuse me. So today we're going to be talking about.
Speaker 1: Issues in France, French jesuits, the Frankish church. Let's start
Speaker 1: with the issue that you want to start with, So
Speaker 1: you tell me where you think is the best place
Speaker 1: to start. Because we've talked a lot about jesuits, accounter
Speaker 1: Reformation pre less when it comes to weird mortification practices,
Speaker 1: the Jesuit usage of heart worship, Abata's works that apparently
Speaker 1: have not been translated into English about the Jesuits, what's
Speaker 1: the best place to start in your mind?
Speaker 3: As the best place to start is you know, thinking
Speaker 3: about I mean into French context what Trenchfitly is, you know,
Speaker 3: because we have a lot of people thinking it's a
Speaker 3: bastion of Catholicism. It's yeah, but we need to think,
Speaker 3: you know, look historically, and then I'm going to get
Speaker 3: there because he's probably one of the best sources we
Speaker 3: have and it needs to be vindicated because a lot
Speaker 3: of people are just not accepting it because you converted.
Speaker 3: But I'll tach on that. So basically what I want
Speaker 3: to go on first is the fact that France is
Speaker 3: actually basically friends started as something very Orthodox, and you know,
Speaker 3: Papism in France, especially after the Vatican One, France always
Speaker 3: has been you know, pushing against it, and really we
Speaker 3: should not see France as this bastion of Catholicism. And
Speaker 3: actually the fact that the SSPX and stuff like this
Speaker 3: are very present in France is is more of a
Speaker 3: side effect of this, because you see whole religious as
Speaker 3: all religious climate was just destroyed after Vatican won. So
Speaker 3: basically the idea is that when we look at the
Speaker 3: history of France, the first king we converted, like the
Speaker 3: French Constantine if you want French in Constantin was actly Clovis,
Speaker 3: and Clovis at the very start. So it was frank
Speaker 3: and the Franks was the only church that converted to Christianity,
Speaker 3: the United Church and Divided Church, which we know is Orthodox.
Speaker 3: And as soon as he did this, as soon as
Speaker 3: he converted, he convoked consuls, namely the Council of Audience
Speaker 3: and the Council of Audience establishes, which is basically opposiphally
Speaker 3: in the Kingdom of Franks. So already we can.
Speaker 1: See that in you because you're saying it really fast.
Speaker 1: The Council of what.
Speaker 3: The Council of Audience Orleans okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, So
Speaker 3: that's in five hundred eleven, okay. And during this council
Speaker 3: there's basically the establishment of autocephony in France. And even
Speaker 3: after the schism, we can see that this idea of
Speaker 3: you know, friends getting centralized, you know, especially after the
Speaker 3: one hundred years wars Friends being centralized also involved, you know,
Speaker 3: centralization of the church and the ideas that the church
Speaker 3: was not just a political tool for the Vatican. And
Speaker 3: we'll see it especially through the Jersuit infiltration, because they
Speaker 3: came a little late, and we can see that. You know,
Speaker 3: in all traditional Christianity there always were a fight against
Speaker 3: such influences. So yes, basically the church that existed in
Speaker 3: France was the Gallican Church. The Gallican Church concept of
Speaker 3: it is very easy. It really looks like the Anglicans,
Speaker 3: except then community. And so the Gallican Church says that
Speaker 3: as a Lieutenant of Christ is actually the king of
Speaker 3: friends of Christ. And here we can see the lieutenant
Speaker 3: like bigger.
Speaker 5: Few will vicker lieutenant lit like.
Speaker 3: Yeah, lieutenant yeah. And just this, you know, it already
Speaker 3: invalidates most of the papal claims to friends because this
Speaker 3: already is that odds with a Vatican one saying that
Speaker 3: there is a universal jurisdictions that the purpose believed to
Speaker 3: have absolute power. And you know it showed even even
Speaker 3: during the First consulta Vatican. During the first consulta Vatican,
Speaker 3: there was a huge French position the Gallican Church and
Speaker 3: the Gallican Church actually is the only reason. One of
Speaker 3: the most clear reasons the Vatican collectively push ultra apism
Speaker 3: like after the Vatican One was the fact that there
Speaker 3: was the Franco Prussian War. Basically, the emperor was captured
Speaker 3: in the old state machine just fell apart.
Speaker 1: Okay, so let's let's take this slow, let's not go
Speaker 1: too faster. So basically, what we're saying is is that
Speaker 1: in this early period, when you have the expansion of
Speaker 1: Christianity into this region, it's essentially orthodox. We think of
Speaker 1: this as the Gallican Church. And you're saying that the
Speaker 1: granting of autocephali here of being self governing more or
Speaker 1: less shows that the practice of the Church in this
Speaker 1: period is Orthodox church governance, and we don't see the
Speaker 1: Vatican one conception here. And this is why this has
Speaker 1: been a problem for the claims of Vatican One. Correct, Yeah, correct, Okay,
Speaker 1: Now that's a first argument. And what I want to
Speaker 1: get to then is when we when we move towards
Speaker 1: the period of Charlemagne, can you enlighten us how before
Speaker 1: we up to it. We see that this is a
Speaker 1: problem of Vatican One, But can you take us through
Speaker 1: the Charlemagne period, just because My understanding is that I'm
Speaker 1: not agreeing with everything that Romanites or any of those
Speaker 1: people say, but there is a point to be made
Speaker 1: here that a lot of Greek writers have made about
Speaker 1: the history of the Frankish Church, which is that it
Speaker 1: does eventually become a tool for the Frankish power. And
Speaker 1: that's where we do start to see problems with Charlemagne.
Speaker 1: And it's actually the letters of Saint Photios the Great
Speaker 1: where he complains about Frankish missionaries, and he does mean
Speaker 1: people under Charlemagne. He's not using the generic term of
Speaker 1: Franks for the Westerns. He's specifically speaking of people from
Speaker 1: the Franks spreading the Phillyoquay missionaries spreading the Philioquay in
Speaker 1: the jurisdictions of Greek churches.
Speaker 5: So is that correct?
Speaker 1: And can you verify that or do you want to
Speaker 1: get into that period next?
Speaker 3: Correct? So, basically what the Franks did, and it started
Speaker 3: with Peppin. He started with Peppin the Great, which is
Speaker 3: the father of Charlemy. They started to see so of
Speaker 3: course they established what a valley because like Frank's means
Speaker 3: free and so so this was starting a club is
Speaker 3: So that's a little bit before but starting at Charlemagne, well,
Speaker 3: start to see a shift. And this shift is is
Speaker 3: about it's seeing the papacy as a tool. So it
Speaker 3: started with the donation of Pepin and then the coronation
Speaker 3: of Charlemagne. So the donation of Papin is the moment
Speaker 3: where the papacy became the theocracy, the moment where powers
Speaker 3: are mixed between temper and the spiritual powers. And yes,
Speaker 3: Charlemagne then used the Church as a tool, and he
Speaker 3: tried to prop up the Vatican as being yeah, more
Speaker 3: powerful and more important that it was.
Speaker 1: Especially I want to add two that I've added this
Speaker 1: link in the chat. That's the link to the to
Speaker 1: the classic article by of Father Denisius Dragas, which quotes
Speaker 1: the letters of Photius talking about the spread of the
Speaker 1: phillyoquay by Frankish missionaries. And everybody who's interested in these
Speaker 1: topics should be aware.
Speaker 5: Of this issue. Hold on one second, hear it, man.
Speaker 1: So let's be clear about this quote. It's very important.
Speaker 1: It's about the middle of the doctrine or.
Speaker 5: Of the essay.
Speaker 1: It says Photius knew, of course that the Roman Church
Speaker 1: had don't approved of the Frankish philioquay, but Frankish missionaries
Speaker 1: had been sent into Bulgaria, and so this is the
Speaker 1: central all these stupid pop ups in this old s
Speaker 1: GeoCities website.
Speaker 5: So let me put that quote.
Speaker 1: Let's it's not gonna let me, it's not gonna let yeah, yes,
Speaker 1: here you go.
Speaker 5: Let me add this quote to the chat here.
Speaker 1: So that you know this is legit, because this always
Speaker 1: comes up in debates and people always have a.
Speaker 5: Problem with this.
Speaker 1: Actually, I don't think I can fit this whole quote
Speaker 1: in the chat, so let me just screenshot this for everybody.
Speaker 5: Anyway.
Speaker 1: So I apologize for interrupting you there, but let I'll
Speaker 1: want to let you continue then. So we've got the
Speaker 1: attempt to utilize the church in a political sense under Charlemagne.
Speaker 1: So there is something to the critique of the Frankish power.
Speaker 1: Let's be clear about this quote here it is. Meyer
Speaker 1: published a study of the Photian Council of eight seventy
Speaker 1: nine eight eighty, putting forward the thesis at the toditle
Speaker 1: of the book was a successful.
Speaker 5: Council of Union.
Speaker 1: In this study, it concluded that a restoration of union
Speaker 1: was needed for the convocation sent out of eight seventy
Speaker 1: nine eighty. More specifically at celebrated peace.
Speaker 5: Once more in the Church of God. But he went
Speaker 5: on to.
Speaker 1: Explain the basis of this unity with theological In his
Speaker 1: own words, this unity meant, first of all unity in
Speaker 1: the same faith. Photios was a strong defender of the
Speaker 1: purity of doctrine. Indeed, where orthodoxy was concerned, Photios was
Speaker 1: the true spokesman of the Byzantine bishops. Meyer goes on,
Speaker 1: this is a Romancoulate writer. The West was also attached
Speaker 1: to the great value of the purity of faith, but
Speaker 1: in fact concentrated more on the question of devotion to
Speaker 1: the Sea of Rome. As a big shocker right the
Speaker 1: Senate of eight seventy nine eighty, the Father's care for
Speaker 1: the purity of doctrine emerged in the Horos, the formula
Speaker 1: of that synod which they proclaimed. This horror cannot be
Speaker 1: understood as a dogmatic definition. But this is quoting the
Speaker 1: romancolt God, but rather as a true expression of the
Speaker 1: ecclesiastical feeling of the synod. It expressed by the conciliar
Speaker 1: usage of the creed of the Niceno Constantapolitan production. There
Speaker 1: is no in other words, the one that was produced
Speaker 1: at Naicino constant not the Nicene Creed without the.
Speaker 5: Philique is what we're talking about here.
Speaker 1: There's no doubt that Photios opposed the addition of the
Speaker 1: philioquay to the creed on dogmatic grounds. It is in
Speaker 1: his famous and cyclical to the Oriental Patriarchs that he
Speaker 1: complained about the addition by the Frankish missionaries working in
Speaker 1: Bulgaria because he was he considered it theologically unacceptable. His
Speaker 1: whole argument is based on the conviction that the addition
Speaker 1: undermined the unity of God. Exactly if you read the Mystagogy,
Speaker 1: this is still correct. We find by Saint Photios. We
Speaker 1: find that the same reasoning in his Mysticgagia as yeah,
Speaker 1: here he goes in his letter to the Archbishop of.
Speaker 5: Aquileia.
Speaker 1: Photios knew that the Roman Church had not approved of
Speaker 1: the Frankish Philioquay. So this is still in the period
Speaker 1: when it's not yet a normative dogmatic issue in the West.
Speaker 1: It does eventually become a normative dogmatic issue, and it's
Speaker 1: later that we see the theology clarified, especially at the
Speaker 1: Ceneta Blackernee, which codifies the Orthodox conception inconsistent harmony with
Speaker 1: the sixth and seventh Councils. In terms of the christology
Speaker 1: and the iconography, this is where we get the essence
Speaker 1: inergy distinctions is where we get uncreated energies in Christ.
Speaker 1: That's what's continued into our synods, and then the Roman
Speaker 1: calitary Church goes its way. Anyway, I wanted to make
Speaker 1: that clear. So let's move on to the next section.
Speaker 1: What do you have next for us in the history
Speaker 1: of the Francish Church.
Speaker 3: Oh well, so basically, yes, as orthodox, which would just
Speaker 3: see that it started out well, it was the only
Speaker 3: tribe that converted to Orthodoxy. But after Charlemaan's is a
Speaker 3: real shift. He basically uses the Visigothic system, and of
Speaker 3: course the Visigoths where being in Spain, they had the
Speaker 3: things from the Toledo Console, including the few Aquay. So
Speaker 3: at this point it's it's heretical. And then we start
Speaker 3: to see the you know, the shift into the the Paschism.
Speaker 3: So basically the Frankish Jewish was always pushing. It was
Speaker 3: always a pushing for more papacy. It was very involved
Speaker 3: in the Crusade and things like this. You have also
Speaker 3: all the strange devotion starting popping up with the Franks
Speaker 3: you had alive on this. We're gonna we're gonna talk
Speaker 3: about this a little bit later when we talk about
Speaker 3: the actual devotions and and and with this, we start
Speaker 3: to see, you know, at this point the Frankish empires
Speaker 3: was sort of dismantled, and you start to see basically
Speaker 3: the rivals.
Speaker 1: Which period is this which.
Speaker 3: Okay, we're talking about high lages, high Middle.
Speaker 1: Ages, I'm mid lagies, Okay, go ahead.
Speaker 3: Okay, So you'll have one center that will be the
Speaker 3: Holy Born Empire Germany and another one which was which
Speaker 3: is the remnants of East Francia, which became Friends and
Speaker 3: Germany when the road of more feudalism more the centralization
Speaker 3: of the time, and France went to the road of
Speaker 3: centralization because feudalism failed very early, you know, with the
Speaker 3: One hundred Years War and so on. And what we
Speaker 3: see is a consolidation of the power of the king
Speaker 3: and the continuation of this idea of French the factocephally
Speaker 3: and you know, whereas the king of the Germans, Henry
Speaker 3: the Fourth was you know, being called humiliated by the pope,
Speaker 3: you know at Canosa. Basically the Pope says that now
Speaker 3: you cannot choose your bishop's public ex communicate you, and
Speaker 3: excommunication then would be war, especially in a very decentralized state.
Speaker 1: So the invested your controversy where the the poe will
Speaker 1: now decide that the selection of bishops and this is
Speaker 1: not going to be in any way connected to the
Speaker 1: idea of the king.
Speaker 5: Correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, basically the idea that friends went the other way.
Speaker 3: Like we see kings, for example, we see kings from
Speaker 3: the valwadynasty already starting.
Speaker 1: To say that again and said a little bit slower what.
Speaker 3: You will say. It's like the philip level and the
Speaker 3: Valwadina state already starting to want more simplization and they
Speaker 3: do not want to be controlled by the pup even
Speaker 3: if it means refusing imperial titles. And that's when you
Speaker 3: you will have, for example, incidents give the papacy. If
Speaker 3: there was a king of Friends who basically sent a
Speaker 3: commander to attack a Pube to capture a pub. I
Speaker 3: think this was led by Chevalier the Nogay, you will
Speaker 3: have this idea of more centralization and you will have
Speaker 3: a strong state institution that are here to control theology.
Speaker 3: And the University of Paris was exactly that.
Speaker 1: So so I'm sorry, I'm still confused. So you're saying
Speaker 1: that that the French state power, which is embodied still
Speaker 1: in Gallicanism, departs from the pope by wanting to continue
Speaker 1: to have the control of who's the bishops, right, yeah, correct, okay, okay, And.
Speaker 3: You can see also through the Avignon papacy and so on.
Speaker 3: So that's why there's the a yeah, yeah, this is
Speaker 3: this is is this idea you know, difficult to France
Speaker 3: so well as Germany was being repted this friends try
Speaker 3: to centralize their compromise, you know, like it's Catholicism, but
Speaker 3: it's the state still. And that's where you can see
Speaker 3: that even even when French was nominally Catholic, they were
Speaker 3: fighting against against papal primacy in exclusive powers to the book,
Speaker 3: and you can see it in Gallicanism later on, and
Speaker 3: you can see it things that combat against the Jesuits,
Speaker 3: because the Jesuits were a papal tool try to infiltrate
Speaker 3: trends and trans actually fought back.
Speaker 5: So the art.
Speaker 1: So the idea here is that this is why the
Speaker 1: Jesuits become a tool of the papal power to go
Speaker 1: into to basically subvert the French state power to bring
Speaker 1: it back under or to actually to bring it under
Speaker 1: the full jurisdiction of the papers.
Speaker 5: That correct.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, and that's what you'd see an it culminates,
Speaker 3: you know, in this Gullican crisis one.
Speaker 5: I say, gotcha.
Speaker 1: So does this fit into the Council of v enn
Speaker 1: and the Frankish throne and the templars? Does that play
Speaker 1: into this?
Speaker 3: The templar very complicated matter because they used to be
Speaker 3: very prevalent in France that there used to be this
Speaker 3: This was with Philip Lebett. There was an agreement between
Speaker 3: the purp and the king to push them out and
Speaker 3: basically take their riches. Right, So yeah, I believe the
Speaker 3: pope was from the Anian this one particular. If I
Speaker 3: remember what I might be wrong.
Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, I'm not trying to get too sidetracked about
Speaker 1: Templar conspiracy. I'm just remembering that there was there were
Speaker 1: complaints about the fact that the the Frankish throne wanted
Speaker 1: there was a part of the Council of the end
Speaker 1: controversy relates to the Frankish power versus the papacy. That's
Speaker 1: part of the problem. Yeah, exactly, Yeah, Okay, so what
Speaker 1: do you want to take us next, So where do
Speaker 1: we want to go into the into the next period?
Speaker 3: The next period historically will be will be the end
Speaker 3: of Gelicanism and will be what's who I will use
Speaker 3: as a basis with because yeah, I'll primarily use his sources.
Speaker 1: Okay, And this is this is Abbe GeTe who Vladimir GeTe,
Speaker 1: who was a convert to Orthodoxy eventually, So if you
Speaker 1: don't know about he wrote a really good book on
Speaker 1: the papacy called The Papacy.
Speaker 5: You can get this on Amazon.
Speaker 1: I recommend that it's one of the good books to
Speaker 1: read as a critique of the papacy, the famous convert here,
Speaker 1: So tell us about this. And I don't you've been
Speaker 1: saying that there's also a book that he's written on
Speaker 1: Jesuits that we don't think is in English.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, I don't think it's available in English. And
Speaker 3: he wrote, basically his master magnum opus was a history
Speaker 3: of the Church. So basically Gette was part of this
Speaker 3: French Gallican Church and he had the approval of the
Speaker 3: French Church, he had the approval of the king, and
Speaker 3: he was mandated as an historian as well. All right,
Speaker 3: about the history of the Frankish Church and the history
Speaker 3: of the Church in general. And what's very funny is
Speaker 3: that his four first terms of the history of the
Speaker 3: Church got accepted by a Vatican and after they get
Speaker 3: put into the index. So whenever people tell you that
Speaker 3: gette you know it was not is that he was biased,
Speaker 3: that it was anti papers and stuff like this. You
Speaker 3: need to remember that the papacy actually actually accepted several
Speaker 3: of his books and he continued his work, he got
Speaker 3: put into the index, and and then the this crisis happened,
Speaker 3: the Vatican One crisis.
Speaker 1: So basically it was so so the papacy itself appreciated
Speaker 1: his research and scholarship until the time of back in One.
Speaker 5: Basically what you're.
Speaker 3: Saying, until he stepped he stepped too far into his stories,
Speaker 3: into his story. And he actually writes this in his book.
Speaker 3: He said that I was put into the index for
Speaker 3: the papacy claimed that I'm being too partial. I was
Speaker 3: put into the index for not being honest officially, and
Speaker 3: he said that I was too light on the papacy,
Speaker 3: uh with for this and yes, it eventually became orthodox.
Speaker 3: If you know his story, call knowledge.
Speaker 1: What do you mean he was too light on the papacy.
Speaker 3: He considered himself, you know, to have not gone far
Speaker 3: enough the papers.
Speaker 1: He said it was too far, but he said I
Speaker 1: didn't go far enough. Yeah, okay, gotcha, Okay, go ahead, okay.
Speaker 3: So yeah, after this describes he went back and you know,
Speaker 3: if many all Catholics like he, he had correspondence before this,
Speaker 3: and basically you need to under sense that Vatican won
Speaker 3: and it was supposed to be like a cry of
Speaker 3: glory of the papacy. It was more for less breath
Speaker 3: because it basically, I've destroyed a lot of traditional what.
Speaker 1: Was the last breath batic in one itself?
Speaker 5: Was you mean?
Speaker 3: Yeah? Because it set them on the course that destroyed
Speaker 3: a lot of the traditional understanding.
Speaker 5: I see, it wasn't that.
Speaker 1: It wasn't didn't do and have a good quote that
Speaker 1: somebody put in the Discord the other day that something
Speaker 1: like from now on, Roman Catholic apologetics will be nothing
Speaker 1: but trying to debate about the papacy.
Speaker 5: It wasn't that something.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's from It's from the same book
Speaker 3: I put it there. So Dolinger was basically the equivalent
Speaker 3: the German equivalent Ignazan Dolinger of of GeTe. He became
Speaker 3: an old Catholic and get became Orthodox and do Linger extensively.
Speaker 3: You know it was also an historian. He was part
Speaker 3: of this historian Catholic historian. We rejected all this. He said, no,
Speaker 3: it doesn't match historically, and yeah he wrote this quad
Speaker 3: it's it's beautiful. He said that from known all the
Speaker 3: art of theology performed by Roman Catholic theology will be
Speaker 3: about determining, uh, which level of infallibility the pope has
Speaker 3: in any statement. And he compares it to the Oracle
Speaker 3: of Delphi. It's the oracle of the tile. Like you
Speaker 3: need something, you don't need to look at audition, you
Speaker 3: just ask him and see what comes out. So, yes,
Speaker 3: this was this great shock in even a traditional Catholicism
Speaker 3: in Europe. So what we need to understand is that
Speaker 3: a elegant one is actually is everything but traditional. And
Speaker 3: that's why you had most of the historian you rejecting
Speaker 3: the paper. Lawyers were fine, of course, that many many
Speaker 3: false document to use. Actually, Dollinger wrote extensively about the
Speaker 3: papist falsification. It tells you that basically you will have
Speaker 3: upwards of ten layers for a single quote of falsification
Speaker 3: anytime it mentions the failure quick anytime it mentions the
Speaker 3: primacy of bitter. So basically it's unusable. And you can
Speaker 3: see it in the patology and the.
Speaker 5: Tona, which is unusable. Which thing.
Speaker 3: Basically, all the quotes Roman Catholic will send you all
Speaker 3: the so called patristic quotes and stuff.
Speaker 1: Like this, because there's the layers of including forgeries, there's
Speaker 1: layers of what jesuit interpolation is that what you're saying.
Speaker 3: You love the Dominicans, you will have the Jesuits you
Speaker 3: will have. And sometimes it's shocking, you know, sometimes you
Speaker 3: will literally see that there will be a little an
Speaker 3: notation it was edity, so this was edited, and you say,
Speaker 3: the original said this, but what's changed to be correct
Speaker 3: to the doctrine just crazy because it's literally admitting to interpolation.
Speaker 3: But sometimes you will compare, compare the Greek and the Latin,
Speaker 3: and you will have a whole paragraph just appearing out
Speaker 3: of nowhere in the Latin edition that it's talking about
Speaker 3: the philurequy, for example, And yeah, sadly, you know, when
Speaker 3: you look at Dollinger's work, it was a great Catholic historian.
Speaker 3: Most of the story. We can get most of the
Speaker 3: manuscripts you can get get from the Vatican heavily into
Speaker 3: politic Really, it's very difficult.
Speaker 1: I see, I see and all this, and you're saying
Speaker 1: that Geta noticed this, or many French writers have noticed.
Speaker 1: Who has kind of pinpointed the interpolations and this kind
Speaker 1: of stuff. Who's who's noticed this? I mean, I know,
Speaker 1: you guys have.
Speaker 3: Most of the old Catholics, you have a lot of people.
Speaker 3: But Getty was really the foremost French afthting on. He
Speaker 3: was a great history and he saws the historical discrepancy,
Speaker 3: and then he looked back into into Catholicism and then
Speaker 3: he realized that, yes, of course it was Orthodoxy all along,
Speaker 3: this was the Church describing Matthew sixteen eighteen. And then
Speaker 3: he looked back at his work, you know, as the
Speaker 3: history of the Church. He looked back at all this
Speaker 3: darkma history and he wrote about it from the Orthodox perspective.
Speaker 3: And that's when it becomes all clear. And we have
Speaker 3: him to think because the pin pointed specific heresies, He
Speaker 3: pin pointed specific historical events that do not match up,
Speaker 3: and he pin pointed the heavy influence of the Jesuits,
Speaker 3: and right now many texts are very difficult to find
Speaker 3: that we can be glad because he was an historian,
Speaker 3: he was accredited, he had the approval of the king,
Speaker 3: he had the approval, he had full access to the
Speaker 3: Library of Blois, which was a huge Catholic library, and
Speaker 3: he could wrote us all this about the heresies, about
Speaker 3: the prelate's devotions and about the heavy influence of the Jesuits.
Speaker 5: Interesting. That's why I'm okay, So what's next on your list?
Speaker 3: I want to talk about the devotions? You know, the
Speaker 3: idea here was mainly to vindicate.
Speaker 1: Okay, and let me pracace us by saying so, basically,
Speaker 1: this relates to some of the criticisms that we've put
Speaker 1: out in the last several months, which is an old criticism,
Speaker 1: that is that what we see in the manifestations of
Speaker 1: devotion between Orthodox Theology and Roman Catholicism is very different.
Speaker 1: And there's a reason for that, particularly in the second millennium,
Speaker 1: the two churches go in different directions, and Orthodoxy of
Speaker 1: course makes a big point to stress that our experience
Speaker 1: of God, we think is unified. We don't think that
Speaker 1: there's a different experience amongst say, monastics in Greece on
Speaker 1: man Athos, as opposed to the church fathers who had
Speaker 1: the experience of God in the desert, you know, one
Speaker 1: seven hundred years ago, the experience of the Light of
Speaker 1: God of Mount Tabor, all those types of things. Theosis
Speaker 1: as a process is unified, and that means we don't
Speaker 1: see the really weird out there, fringe, crazy stuff. And
Speaker 1: this was something that really stuck out to me when
Speaker 1: I began to investigate Orthodoxy back in about two thousand
Speaker 1: and seven, when I was a hardcore trad Catholic, and
Speaker 1: I actually, you know, to be honest, I had some
Speaker 1: issues with the weirdness of some of the so called
Speaker 1: Saints of Rome Catholicism, specifically the women, specifically the flights
Speaker 1: of emotion that they talk about, the stigmata, the sexual imagery,
Speaker 1: and a lot of those things. And what eventually became
Speaker 1: evident to me was the fact that in this I'm
Speaker 1: not saying this to distract from you. I'll want you
Speaker 1: to talk about your topics and the translations and all that,
Speaker 1: but one thing that stuck out is if you read
Speaker 1: a cult Renaissance Church of Rome. He points out the
Speaker 1: fact that in the Renaissance papacy, you had a lot
Speaker 1: of usage of nudes, a lot of usage of things
Speaker 1: that like the Goddess isis being painted and used in
Speaker 1: one of the papal apartments or something like that. And
Speaker 1: this is very especially Bernini, this is very prevalent. After
Speaker 1: you know, all this stuff is used in the Vatican.
Speaker 1: And to me this always stuck out as a tremendous
Speaker 1: hypocrisy because of the trad obsession with mortal sins, and
Speaker 1: yet I can't go to the Vatican without having, you know,
Speaker 1: tiny little peepees on Renaissance people sticking out everywhere, and
Speaker 1: giant boobies of chunky women everywhere, butts everywhere. So I mean,
Speaker 1: it's very absurd that this nude art is everywhere. But
Speaker 1: at the same time we're told about this, you know,
Speaker 1: absurd doctrine of mortal venial sins, which is not what
Speaker 1: first John's talking about.
Speaker 5: It's not a distinction between mortal and menial sins, by
Speaker 5: the way, anyway.
Speaker 1: So that with that in mind, that always stuck out
Speaker 1: to me as a problem. And so I think that
Speaker 1: Preluss is a much better example of explaining what's going
Speaker 1: on here when we have Fassina Kowalska claiming that the
Speaker 1: host floats around the room to her and Jesus told
Speaker 1: her personally, you're my favorite of all the nuns. We're
Speaker 1: basically boyfriend girlfriend. All this kind of absurdity which is
Speaker 1: nowhere in an Orthodox spirituality at all. And the fact
Speaker 1: that Rome Catholicism accepts Orthodox spirituality in terms of unionism,
Speaker 1: which is just a plot actually to bring people back
Speaker 1: onto the dominance of the Roman bishop, shows that there's
Speaker 1: not a unified experience of God in the Realmian calogy church.
Speaker 1: You can't have this absurd sexual imagery and weird stuff
Speaker 1: being true and the stigmata being true at the same
Speaker 1: time as the stuff over here with Oh, but we
Speaker 1: also accept Palamism, you know, since we've made Palamas a
Speaker 1: saint in our unit it circles and we know accept him.
Speaker 1: None of that makes any sense. It's all completely contradictory.
Speaker 1: And what it shows is that the evolution of dogma
Speaker 1: the umbrella of Rome is really just an umbrella of
Speaker 1: the power of the papacy, and we're seeing that unravel now.
Speaker 1: But so let's talk about those spiritual practices I remember,
Speaker 1: you know, as finally it was. It was Larshae when
Speaker 1: I got a hold of Thank you to Father Moody
Speaker 1: for sending me the Larshae trilogy where he talks about
Speaker 1: the healing of spiritual illnesses, and that to me really
Speaker 1: solidified the difference between the way that we view the
Speaker 1: body the way that we view the practices of asceticism.
Speaker 1: In the East, it's different than it is in the West.
Speaker 1: You're not flagellating yourself, you're not mortifying the body. The
Speaker 1: body is participating in theosis, and so that the purpose
Speaker 1: of asceticism is completely different.
Speaker 5: So I'll let you have the floor now after my
Speaker 5: little rant.
Speaker 3: Okay, yeah, correct, So I will first start by addressing
Speaker 3: something a lot of people accuse us, you know, of
Speaker 3: hitting low and criticizing satans on We don't. We don't
Speaker 3: criticize the person. We just say that here's the devotions
Speaker 3: are not good and and yes we need to point
Speaker 3: that out. And you know it's been down through the
Speaker 3: forms of meme and stuff like this, because not everybody can,
Speaker 3: you know, go on a theology debate and at some
Speaker 3: at some point people need to see I believe people,
Speaker 3: can you know I'm not appealing to emotion here, but
Speaker 3: people can feel what's right what's wrong, and we can
Speaker 3: and here we're gonna express didn't discuss, you know, the differences.
Speaker 3: But yes, I believe that this is a talking point.
Speaker 3: It's not eating low, it's not slendering. It's talking about
Speaker 3: this practices which exists.
Speaker 1: Just say hitting low, yeah, like a low blow.
Speaker 3: Yeah, okay, okay, Yeah, we've been criticized for this. It
Speaker 3: is very interesting. And and yes, first of all, we
Speaker 3: can see that Orthodox theology not the body, and this
Speaker 3: is not a book by lash, it's just a great,
Speaker 3: great theology in the theology of the body. It just
Speaker 3: expresses the classic autogous point of view that believe in
Speaker 3: a fallen world, fallen nature, and all bodies actually healed
Speaker 3: by the Divinity. And we can see that it culminates
Speaker 3: in theosis, the theosis healing people and the light of Tabor.
Speaker 3: This is the ultimate mark of sanctity in Orthodox Church.
Speaker 1: And that's unified across the board. We don't think it's
Speaker 1: different for anybody.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and we for example, we we had a lot
Speaker 3: of Western Saint like John Cassion who actually was a Parlamite,
Speaker 3: so to say like, yeah, they are part of this
Speaker 3: tradition of in this view of sanctity, and what we
Speaker 3: can see in Rome, especially after the schism, is that
Speaker 3: it's totally reversed. Like we we see the appearance of
Speaker 3: devotional hurting, like it's not fasting, it's not, it's it's
Speaker 3: really hurting yourself, altering yourself. This is already against going
Speaker 3: against canons Canon twenty twenty four of Saint Basil. If
Speaker 3: I remember well forbids you know self harm is it
Speaker 3: basically says that it's on the same level as killing.
Speaker 3: You cannot you cannot hurt your flesh because you're fleshed
Speaker 3: participate of this. That's ale link to many things, you know,
Speaker 3: or we are buried, the belief in reincarnation, so on.
Speaker 3: And we see not only people like flash people that
Speaker 3: start to hurt them to want to experience pain, but
Speaker 3: we also see marks of sanctity that are alterations of
Speaker 3: the body and that are painful, you know. And we
Speaker 3: know that pain comes from the fault. It's not divine.
Speaker 3: It's not coming back to the original adamic state. It's
Speaker 3: not you know, the pain is the result of the fall.
Speaker 3: You cannot be divinized into a result of the fall.
Speaker 3: And that's exactly what the stigma is. And if you
Speaker 3: look at it, for example, the ones of Patrick Pierre
Speaker 3: very very noticeable, they look purulent, you know, some people
Speaker 3: purulent like basically some people even compared it to like
Speaker 3: it says it looks like her pies or it looks
Speaker 3: like it looks like you s won't and it actually hurt.
Speaker 3: And this is a complete it's a completement version. And
Speaker 3: even if we look at earlier Catholic things, they were associated,
Speaker 3: you know, with motition, miracles, healing for example.
Speaker 5: This is a great point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we know that that there's gifts of healing according
Speaker 1: to Saint Paul, and there have been many healers. And
Speaker 1: then suddenly though in the Middle Ages, after we get
Speaker 1: this schism, the Roman Catholic Church begins to develop these
Speaker 1: very bizarre practices that this is a great point. That
Speaker 1: seem to be obsessed with paying debts through pain, and
Speaker 1: I think we have to mention indulgences and the paying
Speaker 1: of debts too, because that's a big part of it.
Speaker 1: Even though the official Roman Cathology might not ultimately condone
Speaker 1: that although indulgences are a false doctrine, the idea is
Speaker 1: still there. That you're kind of paying for things, paying
Speaker 1: for temporal punishments.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's one of the percent penal substitution theologic. So yes,
Speaker 3: you have these marks appearing, and that's very that's a
Speaker 3: total invention, and that's that's very we have to say
Speaker 3: the least. We're going to address some of the most
Speaker 3: famous ones, for example, Francis a Sisi and Francis a Sisi.
Speaker 3: You know, we have father serp In Rose who acily
Speaker 3: wrote about this and he said that it can it
Speaker 3: can well be prolete, it can be fake, but you
Speaker 3: believe that there was some idea of you know, it
Speaker 3: being psychosomatic. And this is very much linked too. And
Speaker 3: we're going to talk about the Jesuits now very much
Speaker 3: linked to the introduction by many Jesuits of the idea
Speaker 3: of emotionality in this cult. So before the cult was
Speaker 3: removing your emotions, removing uh these things and you know,
Speaker 3: being ascended through the removal of emotions, you know, saying
Speaker 3: John Cassion called all these emotions spirits like the related
Speaker 3: to demons, like a whole set of little demons that
Speaker 3: can pull you down.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is this is pretty key. I want to
Speaker 1: stress this. This is something that is in the debate
Speaker 1: between the barley Mite and Palamas, he talks about this
Speaker 1: very point where he says that the passions are not
Speaker 1: inherently evil in themselves per se, but what happens is
Speaker 1: that when we follow them in an inordinate way, it
Speaker 1: becomes demonic. And so what happens in asceticism, and the
Speaker 1: whole purpose of asceticism is self control, so that we
Speaker 1: can achieve a state where we're not dominated by our passions.
Speaker 1: That's the whole point of this. And what you get
Speaker 1: here in this stuff is the inversion of that. And
Speaker 1: the man's psychology becomes inverted, and it becomes obsessed upon
Speaker 1: the sort of punishment of the body and the whereas
Speaker 1: you have a harmony between man's faculties in the process
Speaker 1: of theosis, this gets inverted and you get the dominance
Speaker 1: of emotionalism. And that's what's so key to here, especially
Speaker 1: in these weird women saints who think that Jesus is
Speaker 1: saying that their boyfriend girlfriend stuff.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm going to come to that because women were
Speaker 3: prime target, especially for Jesuits. So yes, basically we have
Speaker 3: the introduction of emotionality and suggest with a big part
Speaker 3: of this and for example, you know Saint Francis Assisi,
Speaker 3: and people as this started to picture themselves being crucified,
Speaker 3: taking the place of Christ. And that's why that's what
Speaker 3: Father Sefi Rose theorizes. Basically, they would it would be
Speaker 3: psychosomatic ones because they would have intense emotion in them
Speaker 3: all the time, and that at some point the body
Speaker 3: would just accept, Okay, I have nails in the hands. Yes.
Speaker 1: And even though that that Filipino practice of doing this
Speaker 1: to yourself and doing this on Good Friday is supposedly
Speaker 1: officially condemned, the point is that it's you're seeing these manifestations.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that the whole church is false because
Speaker 1: people who are villagers do these things that are not condoned.
Speaker 1: I mean that happens in any religion. But what I'm
Speaker 1: saying is that these manifestations are happening because there actually
Speaker 1: is an around us anthropology and an erroneous doctrine of
Speaker 1: how to heal mankind in the Roman Catholic scheme.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Correct, And you have this idea of you know
Speaker 3: the fact that there is no more exclusivity, and this
Speaker 3: is probably because of a nestorianism.
Speaker 1: Because there is no more what you say that again,
Speaker 1: exclusivity in what sense.
Speaker 3: There's no more, for example, exclusivity of Christ as being divinized,
Speaker 3: because that's when you see a lot of prophecies being
Speaker 3: shifted from Christ to the Theotokos.
Speaker 1: So basically everybody becomes a kind of Christ who can
Speaker 1: participate as a sacrifice, is what you're.
Speaker 3: Saying, exactly, And that's what for example, if you look
Speaker 3: at what Loyola wrote, So the first Jesuit, the guy
Speaker 3: who funded the it's exactly this. He believes that he lived,
Speaker 3: you know, physically with Christ around. He believes that he
Speaker 3: was anointed by the Father. And and the term used
Speaker 3: is associated vives the son. And that's why they took
Speaker 3: this the name Societa, Yes, the Company of Christ of Jesus.
Speaker 3: And they they really were into this historianism, and we
Speaker 3: can see it in at every step of the dogmas.
Speaker 5: Oh wow, this is this is key, this is key.
Speaker 5: Let's let's highlight this. So you're saying.
Speaker 1: That there is an implicit sort of lurking nestorianism in
Speaker 1: this idea that there's not one soul son of God
Speaker 1: who's the divine person of the logos who took on
Speaker 1: human nature who's in hyposthetized. There's now the possibility in
Speaker 1: this mystical union of anybody becoming a participant in their
Speaker 1: own kind of little savior in this process of the
Speaker 1: crucifixion in their own life. And that's why everybody kind
Speaker 1: of takes it upon themselves to sort of induce a
Speaker 1: kind of self sacrifice. Almost, is that what you're saying exactly?
Speaker 5: That would a story.
Speaker 3: Not only that, you mentioned a lot of women Saint
Speaker 3: who who thought that basically Jesus was there a girlfriendfrid
Speaker 3: well whatever. Because of this, this removes you know, the
Speaker 3: idea of mystical marriage. And this was pointed out. You know,
Speaker 3: if the like Theresa Favilla, you know, women who got
Speaker 3: Catherine of Sienna ala Coq, which is really the worst offender.
Speaker 3: People who get like foal skin rings as a wedding gift,
Speaker 3: People who believe that there is a marriage to be
Speaker 3: arranged personally between them and Christ. This this is corrupting
Speaker 3: the idea of the mystical marriage of the Church of
Speaker 3: Christ into a into an exclusive personal marriage between one
Speaker 3: none and Chris y thing.
Speaker 1: So this is this little the error of Nestorianism and Christology.
Speaker 1: The same kind of error that would apply to the
Speaker 1: the tokos. It's being transferred over to the error in ecclesiology,
Speaker 1: that there's one mystical body of Christ, which is the
Speaker 1: whole Church, is now being transferred over into the mystical
Speaker 1: experiences of the individual saints.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: And it's being what's the word I'm looking for, it's
Speaker 1: overly sensual and it becomes this kind of weird sexualized thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I'm going to come to the civilized thing.
Speaker 3: So basically what what we see. Okay, I'm going to
Speaker 3: take writings by French French priests on the times it
Speaker 3: just started to pour in. Okay, this is what after.
Speaker 3: I'll probably talk about the Council of Trent first. So
Speaker 3: before we talk about all this, I know that there
Speaker 3: will be people who start to say that you'll have you,
Speaker 3: you can be a Catholic and not be Cheswich, you
Speaker 3: can you can do all this and not be ches
Speaker 3: which you don't have to accept it. It's just one company.
Speaker 3: It goes further than that, and we're going to go
Speaker 3: a bit later on. We're going to be go a
Speaker 3: bit further later on. If the implication of the Jesuit
Speaker 3: everything they did are powerful there, but the key in
Speaker 3: Catholicism because the leader of the Council of Trent was
Speaker 3: a Jesuit. It was the general of the Jesuit lanies.
Speaker 3: And this council is the basis of Roman Catholic dogma,
Speaker 3: so you can't really dodge it, you know. And it's
Speaker 3: at this point that they refuse the idea of a
Speaker 3: traditional considerasm. And there, of course, during this Council of
Speaker 3: Trent where basically this man Lany says that, well, you know,
Speaker 3: the church and paraphrasing here of course before anybody is
Speaker 3: not translating, well enough, well you have people who want
Speaker 3: to come back to the Church of the Apostle, but
Speaker 3: there is a time and there is a need. That's
Speaker 3: what he said. So basically they acknowledge the fact that
Speaker 3: they were not following the traditional organization of the church.
Speaker 3: And in the same consult the declared that the church
Speaker 3: is the slave to the Pope, that the church that
Speaker 3: all the bishops are servants to the pope, which was
Speaker 3: not the case before.
Speaker 1: Yeah, by the way, just speaking just on this little
Speaker 1: side note, isn't it Captain of Sienna who says something
Speaker 1: like even if the pope is the devil, we must
Speaker 1: obey him.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think it's Captain of Sienna who has a
Speaker 1: famous quote about that that even if the Pope were
Speaker 1: Satan and he were to come to you, it's your
Speaker 1: duty to submit to the pope, even if you say it.
Speaker 1: Pretty funny quote. I mean, I know that's not calic, dog.
Speaker 1: I just want to throw that one in there. But so, yeah,
Speaker 1: so this is good.
Speaker 5: Sorry, go ahead.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's when you see that they start to
Speaker 3: infiltrate a lot. So I will go on the politics
Speaker 3: side a little bit later. We're going to focus on
Speaker 3: the weird devotions a bit more. And and I'm going
Speaker 3: to quote this uh uh, this French French priest Rucily
Speaker 3: wrote writes about suggests and the infiltration most like most
Speaker 3: notably in the University of Paris, and he criticizes a doctrine.
Speaker 1: Hold one second something, before you quote that, I just
Speaker 1: want to let you know I'm not going anywhere. I'm
Speaker 1: going to step away just to pour more coffee. So
Speaker 1: you do your quote and don't pay any attention to
Speaker 1: the fact that I'm stepping away. I'm still here.
Speaker 3: You really need to hear that, Okay, let's go.
Speaker 1: Well, no, but if I step away, some people, if
Speaker 1: you see me step away, people get distracted and they
Speaker 1: think I'm leaving or something. But so go ahead and
Speaker 1: read your quote, because everybody's seeing the picture of Terresa
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 3: Okay, So he starts by criticizing their doctrine and then
Speaker 3: he says they are spreading into the people, especially among
Speaker 3: the women Catechism which is filled with some superstition that
Speaker 3: are here to enslave their mind. So here you can
Speaker 3: see that they already saw the primary target, and they
Speaker 3: already saw that through you know, removing the exclusivity and
Speaker 3: through putting a lot of emotionality. There are prime targets
Speaker 3: in women. And that's when you see, you know, a
Speaker 3: lot of stigmat appearing, all these weird evotions appearing. And yeah,
Speaker 3: some of them were clearly in the Storian And we're
Speaker 3: going to talk a little bit about about Saint Mary
Speaker 3: Margaret Ala Cock.
Speaker 1: Okay, Yeah, this is a great point too, because yeah,
Speaker 1: and we want to keep the Nestorianism in mind, because
Speaker 1: it is going to be relevant when we get to
Speaker 1: the issue of a sacred heart, because the heart worship
Speaker 1: and the sacred heart stuff is a manifestation of what's
Speaker 1: explicitly condemned as an historian by the council's officers.
Speaker 5: So anyway, go ahead.
Speaker 3: So yeah, I'm going to read what's not read, but
Speaker 3: I'm gonna tell what's sweeten, especially about Maggie Mary Margaret
Speaker 3: Alacoque in Getta's book, and Getty had access to the
Speaker 3: original and the guy who wrote it was a father
Speaker 3: just with and he was sainted kind of nice simply
Speaker 3: because he wrote this.
Speaker 1: I've been contradicted, you know, before we go into that,
Speaker 1: because there may be a lot of people in the
Speaker 1: chat who aren't familiar with this story. She's the one
Speaker 1: who claims that Jesus carved out her heart and put
Speaker 1: his heart in her right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, So basically all this is serious information. I've
Speaker 3: been called many things for putting this forward. If you
Speaker 3: look at Catholic apologies to the website, they all contradict themselves.
Speaker 3: There's no primary sources. Is the closest thing we can
Speaker 3: get to the primary sources, and it tells us that
Speaker 3: some of the weird stuff might be in the future
Speaker 3: destroyed by sess regarding the method. So yes, the woman
Speaker 3: I thought she had a special relationship with Christ. She
Speaker 3: saw him appear to her at night in a room.
Speaker 3: A lot of the time, they would say, they discuss
Speaker 3: a lot of things, and here comes a weird devotion,
Speaker 3: you know, the devotion that involved blood, and that involves,
Speaker 3: you know, the reviving of old Frankish mythos. To just
Speaker 3: control the French polation better.
Speaker 1: So be real clear and elaborate that point. Why is
Speaker 1: this a reference to the old French mythosh.
Speaker 3: So you talk about this on the previous life. Basically
Speaker 3: Frankish Frankish.
Speaker 1: Hard worship, right, is that where you're getting at?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I would have the her worship and
Speaker 3: they would have a lot of bloody worship. They will
Speaker 3: have violence of blood of the saints. I believe the
Speaker 3: blood that some particularities the Franks, I believe there were
Speaker 3: different race almost at times, and there they will have
Speaker 3: a lot of focus blot and the judgment will use that.
Speaker 3: And you know that's what this French French priest he
Speaker 3: said that they are reviving, Uh, they are reviving superstitions.
Speaker 1: So the j are capitalizing on the superstition and basically
Speaker 1: kind of targeting women for this. That's what's key here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, and you see that she did a lot
Speaker 3: of crazy stuff, like she claims that after each time
Speaker 3: they met, she would do blood letting, which is also
Speaker 3: linked to the old Frankish tradition of you know, do
Speaker 3: blood letting of the meetings between lovers, if not sex.
Speaker 3: You will also have this, uh, this tradition no of
Speaker 3: taking the organs worshiping them, and that's the whole is
Speaker 3: a sacred hurt. That's a that's this that she claims
Speaker 3: that the Christ just pulled the herd out of her
Speaker 3: chest and basically they switched. You will have you know,
Speaker 3: her carving her breast chest.
Speaker 1: Now, what would you say to somebody who says, just
Speaker 1: to play double's advocate, I don't think this. But what
Speaker 1: would you say, that's just a symbolic imagery. You're intentionally
Speaker 1: uh you know, misrepresent our saints.
Speaker 3: Well, I'm not, because you know, all these things were
Speaker 3: put forward, you know also in the context of the
Speaker 3: counter Reformation and this this stuff. You know, this physicality
Speaker 3: was here in clearer position. Do you know, the more
Speaker 3: means the less the new president of So they would
Speaker 3: do all they can to push the the emotionalities, they
Speaker 3: will do all they can to push the physicalities. They
Speaker 3: will do all they can to push you know, your
Speaker 3: tocos because yeah, you know, order to plan as a
Speaker 3: lot of Protestants, and for the longest time, as this
Speaker 3: was believed to be to be true, to to be
Speaker 3: actual miracles. And right now you see a lot of
Speaker 3: modern Catholics taking the Protestant wrote sadly and starting to
Speaker 3: deny the miracles. If I were oppose this kind of criticism,
Speaker 3: I would say that if you start denying your miracles,
Speaker 3: when we deny the transpartantiation in the Eucharist, is this
Speaker 3: we believed to be miracles?
Speaker 5: That's a good point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean typically it's not interpreted as merely allegories
Speaker 1: or spiritual tales. I mean they're interpreted to be real
Speaker 1: miracles exactly. That's why they're saints. You can't be a
Speaker 1: saint in the real mechaolic scheme unless you've you know,
Speaker 1: done the vat can approve miracles.
Speaker 3: Exactly. And actually, when the when the stories about the
Speaker 3: Holy Hurt were being translated into Italian, the Pope God
Speaker 3: is and on it and he immediately rejected it. The
Speaker 3: you know here theological leaders, right, and he he rejected it.
Speaker 3: And what it justit did was waiting for the next
Speaker 3: pop to come about, and they they started to push it,
Speaker 3: and I think they pushed it two more times until
Speaker 3: the pope eventually gave in and he said, okay, you
Speaker 3: you can have this devotion, even if it was forbidden before.
Speaker 3: You can have it, but it needs to be the
Speaker 3: allegorical hurt so the love of Christ. But of course
Speaker 3: they didn't. They didn't care, and even when it was
Speaker 3: previously forbidden, they would go around and sell little medals,
Speaker 3: little books and so on to popularize the myth around
Speaker 3: the population. Maybe they didn't hear of people infallibility at
Speaker 3: the time, but yeah. Basically they would go behind the
Speaker 3: back of the pope to further the dogma. And even
Speaker 3: though the suggests were usually allies of the pope that
Speaker 3: would like they are here to his own goals.
Speaker 1: So they were utilizing the superstitions to further their plans,
Speaker 1: and even under papal suppression, they still continued to do.
Speaker 1: This is what you're saying, And we should make another
Speaker 1: point too that part of the reason for this being
Speaker 1: a problem is the Jesuit idea of inculturation. If you're
Speaker 1: not familiar the Jesuit pross approach to missionary work was
Speaker 1: different than a lot of the other missionary approaches, both
Speaker 1: in the first millennium of the Church and in other
Speaker 1: orders like the Dominicans. The Jesuits really pioneered the idea
Speaker 1: of inculturation, which was the idea that you kind of
Speaker 1: just utilize a lot of the ideas that are in
Speaker 1: the existing culture. Now, everybody who does missionary work to
Speaker 1: some degree does some kind of inculturation. I mean, Herman
Speaker 1: of Alaska did versions of this where he would find
Speaker 1: what was good in the Aluit culture and so forth.
Speaker 1: So it's not that the whole thing is wrong, and
Speaker 1: the whole history of the Church, which is encounter with
Speaker 1: Hellenism for the first millennium and all the councils dealing
Speaker 1: with the Hellenic presuppositions, which the Fathers are very clear
Speaker 1: that the Christological heresies are all built on Hellenic dialectical presupposition.
Speaker 1: So I'm not trying to oversimplify it. But there is
Speaker 1: an aspect to which the Jesuit approach was unique because
Speaker 1: they were the most extreme when it came to trying
Speaker 1: to meld the Christianity with the existing culture, and so
Speaker 1: they would be the most pioneering of acumenism of all
Speaker 1: these different weird practices, and that's why it gets into
Speaker 1: the weirdness in the period that you're talking about, with
Speaker 1: the promotion of these devotions that would be in previous
Speaker 1: periods seen completely to be absurd. But in the Roman
Speaker 1: Catholic scheme this is justified by the fact that theology
Speaker 1: is always developing, it's always growing. It's a seed that
Speaker 1: grows into a giant tree, and that therefore justifies all
Speaker 1: of the innovations after the first millennium.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, and we can go in a bit further,
Speaker 3: you know, there's some more points went to cover. So yes,
Speaker 3: there's this, there is this diversity of devotion and basically
Speaker 3: every every thing, every ideology, every people, every group of
Speaker 3: people will get their own specific devotion, even if it
Speaker 3: doesn't make sense. So you will get load for the French,
Speaker 3: you will get Akita for the Japanese. All of them
Speaker 3: are devotion of the Theotocos. You will even have the
Speaker 3: Lady of All the Nations, which is a specific devotion
Speaker 3: of the Theotokos, which was invented after after World War
Speaker 3: two to promote you know, peace in the world. So
Speaker 3: this is just you know, creating devotions, to be interesting,
Speaker 3: to be relevant, to be hip. And again there is
Speaker 3: this specification which is about again showing that there is
Speaker 3: no more exclusivity. You know, the Theotokos is not only Theotokos.
Speaker 3: She's also here to protect Europe, the European Union. She's
Speaker 3: here to protect the Japanese specifically, French specifically some children.
Speaker 3: And you have this.
Speaker 1: She's being used as a geopolitical tool in in much
Speaker 1: the same way as the Jesuits were utilizing a lot
Speaker 1: of these these sort of superstitions as tools of their time, I.
Speaker 3: Mean the emacular conceptions, so mode and stuff like this.
Speaker 3: It was pushed by the Jesuits and some method as
Speaker 3: the as the Sacred heard. You know, there was a
Speaker 3: debate and they pushed it to make it very popular,
Speaker 3: and the Pope was a bit endstiled at some point
Speaker 3: because you would lose a lot of people if they
Speaker 3: the united So so yes, there is again.
Speaker 1: And let's not forget that the pioneers and Champions, along
Speaker 1: with the Royal Society of both the Big Bang Darwinian
Speaker 1: evolution and the rejection of creation and the Patristic doction
Speaker 1: of creation and the Six Council's profession of faith about
Speaker 1: creation has been none other than the Jesuits. I mean,
Speaker 1: I know that typically Tahar dis Shardine is cited as somebody,
Speaker 1: oh the Vatican censored him. Yeah, But now since he
Speaker 1: was censored, the post Vatican two popes have all made
Speaker 1: some very glowing, loving statements about the wonderful theology of
Speaker 1: Tahard de Shardin. And what did I just post on
Speaker 1: the Twitter this this week from Father Surfin Rose and
Speaker 1: his magisterial book Genesis, Creation and Early Man was the
Speaker 1: fact that Tahar de Shardin claims that he became convinced
Speaker 1: of his evolutionary dogmas because he talked to the thing.
Speaker 1: I am not joking. He literally claims to have been
Speaker 1: walking in a desert talking to the thing literal John
Speaker 1: Carpenter level theology, and the thing told him that everything
Speaker 1: is material evolutionary flux, progressing towards the Omega point, the newosphere,
Speaker 1: et cetera, et cetera. So here are the champions of
Speaker 1: the rejection of the doctrine of creation none other than
Speaker 1: the Jesuits. And so I've really been struck this last
Speaker 1: week by the fact that, I mean I knew this
Speaker 1: in the past, because I've read three or four books
Speaker 1: on Jesuits over the last ten or twelve years. But
Speaker 1: it's really struck me how instrumental they've been in pushing
Speaker 1: fraud paleontology, particularly Tahart, who was present at many of
Speaker 1: the paleontological frauds.
Speaker 5: Pilt down Man, this kind of stuff.
Speaker 1: They've been central in promoting Lemitra the Big Bang, which
Speaker 1: is a secularized version. So the Jesuits are so interested
Speaker 1: in culturation that they're even trying to water things down
Speaker 1: for all the atheists, right. And what we noticed this
Speaker 1: week as well was that the natural theology propositions and
Speaker 1: Aquinas's acceptance of death existing before the fall, it's only
Speaker 1: natural in Humani generis, Pope Piesta twelve wealth would so
Speaker 1: easily accept theistic evolution. This is what natural theology is
Speaker 1: a big part of this. And natural theology is just
Speaker 1: part and parcel of this overall Nestorian doctrine that you're
Speaker 1: talking about. That the Jesuits are really pioneering here because
Speaker 1: it's a Nestorian, because perennialism is a Nestorian. In fact,
Speaker 1: you can go look up that Perennialist James Custinger, he
Speaker 1: has a talk where he said that they ask him
Speaker 1: why did you become why did you move away from
Speaker 1: Orthodoxy towards perennialism, And he says, because Jesus is just
Speaker 1: an avatar of this overriding God that we can all
Speaker 1: experience and all be a part of. That's an Nestorian.
Speaker 1: He literally says, Jesus is a human person and the
Speaker 1: son of God. Is this mystical experience across all the religions,
Speaker 1: and that's why that's the secret, you could say, to Nestorianism,
Speaker 1: to all the hermeticism, that's the secret to this garbage
Speaker 1: of Tahart and the Jesuit Is this undergirding Nestorianism that
Speaker 1: you pointed out, This is this is devastating.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's also some healthy level of originism. You know,
Speaker 3: the idea of Christ as returning as a spherical form.
Speaker 5: Yeah, right, the body.
Speaker 1: It's not an actual body, it's the higher spherical form
Speaker 1: that we're all transformed into in the resurrection.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I just wanted to cover one or two more topics,
Speaker 3: not directly to the jugement, and then we'll switch to
Speaker 3: the very political idea of the Jesuits. But when it
Speaker 3: comes to the theology of the body, we can also
Speaker 3: see discrepancies. So we talked about the sigma. First of all,
Speaker 3: this little football thought. It is a painful mark that
Speaker 3: appeared mystically on people that made them recognizable, and it
Speaker 3: was after the schism. It sounds eerily similar to the
Speaker 3: mark of kine, you know, stually, the fact that it's visible, painful,
Speaker 3: and things like this just foot for thought and and
Speaker 3: I want to touch really quickly and the idea of interruption,
Speaker 3: because the idea of interruption is also different, it has
Speaker 3: been altered. And so interruption basically is the idea that
Speaker 3: people that have been touched by the spirit, saints and
Speaker 3: people like this, their body will not corrupt, they will
Speaker 3: not decay as preparently or as passed. And this has
Speaker 3: been observed in Orthodoxy for quite a while. And what
Speaker 3: we can see is the is that the Catholic, especially
Speaker 3: the New Saints, the very popular one is they are
Speaker 3: trying to cover it. So for example, if you look
Speaker 3: at an Orthodox incorrupted saying, you will see, for example,
Speaker 3: since spirital since Spiriton is currently residing on the island
Speaker 3: of Corfe, and so he was a father parcipate as
Speaker 3: the Council of Nicea. So that's very early, and they
Speaker 3: he basically looks like a mummy, but he's still you know,
Speaker 3: supple is flexible. His skin doesn't break, and things like this.
Speaker 3: It doesn't it doesn't look pretty, but it's it's interrupted.
Speaker 3: It's not you know, the French is not rotting and
Speaker 3: things like this. This is interruption. Actually you can you
Speaker 3: can go there sometimes sometimes of the year and they
Speaker 3: will give you relics of him. You know, they would
Speaker 3: just change his clothes and and give you your relics
Speaker 3: of him. I think my girlfriend has even got one
Speaker 3: from there, which is very cool.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: That's another way to be connected. Previ at the Kubi
Speaker 3: may and and in the meantime you will see in
Speaker 3: the Catholic Church, for example, for the the Lord Revelation.
Speaker 3: So it's it was Bernardette Subiru, which is so a
Speaker 3: miracle that confirmed the dogma, which is also something very
Speaker 3: interesting because miracles start to from dog mouse starts to
Speaker 3: confirm that the pope is right, which is very interesting.
Speaker 3: She she was believed to be in corrupted and they
Speaker 3: basically put a layer of wax on her face and
Speaker 3: claimed yeah, she's corrupted and and things like this, and
Speaker 3: when they exhubit, they realized that she wasn't, so they
Speaker 3: actually had to redo the wax thing, or actually they
Speaker 3: did it just after. But the idea is that no,
Speaker 3: there is not even there's not anymore the thissunderstanding of incorruption.
Speaker 3: You know, incorruption must be spotless. It must be you know, perfuction,
Speaker 3: it must be ah ah yeah, it must really imitate life.
Speaker 3: It's not showing something particular, it's it's it's aping it.
Speaker 3: And we can see it with Pard Pierre as well.
Speaker 3: Pard Pierre, you know, he's got a very h is
Speaker 3: animated in the church and you can see it basically
Speaker 3: looks like a snow white is in a glass coffin
Speaker 3: and in there he's got a silicon mask on his face.
Speaker 3: So no, there is this theology of the flesh of bodies,
Speaker 3: a blood, bloody devotion push off. The Roman Church cannot
Speaker 3: given snowashing.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's funny. He does look like snow white.
Speaker 3: That's funny. Yeah. Yeah. There is this idea of the
Speaker 3: contactcept interruption is they need to if you think it,
Speaker 3: they need to cover it to mask it. And of
Speaker 3: course he shows intent and things like this.
Speaker 1: Now, this is kind of new to me because I
Speaker 1: never really paid attention to this aspect. I didn't go
Speaker 1: see you know, Patrick Pio or anything. And do Roman
Speaker 1: Catholics try to defend a silicon mask or do they
Speaker 1: say it doesn't exist or you're just making that up
Speaker 1: or what's the usual response to this?
Speaker 3: Oh, you will have a lot of responses. You know,
Speaker 3: basically it's I don't know what the official stance is
Speaker 3: that you know, if it really was was not a problem,
Speaker 3: why why put a silicon mask on you? So you
Speaker 3: have a lot of people who say is incorrupted. For example,
Speaker 3: Vi Bernard and Subiru. They had to retract the claims
Speaker 3: of interruption, I believe because they realized she was not interrupted.
Speaker 3: You know, even behind that works.
Speaker 1: Really, so yeah, they retracted incorrupt incruptibility on Bernadette.
Speaker 5: I didn't I didn't wrong. I just didn't know that.
Speaker 3: I should look it further. But basically, there were there
Speaker 3: were claims, and there were it was confirmed that yes,
Speaker 3: her body did corrupt. And that's what you see is
Speaker 3: the whole theology of the body is a full inversion,
Speaker 3: and you know, sometimes it's going the other way around.
Speaker 3: Sometimes it's it's pushing as far as possible, and we
Speaker 3: didn't have that in the West originally. You know, I
Speaker 3: come from as Us in a very important sayings there.
Speaker 5: You come from where from basically a region.
Speaker 3: Of friends, and they have once we have they were
Speaker 3: as yeah, and we had this thing. For example, Saint Adelia,
Speaker 3: the first miracle was that she was born blind and
Speaker 3: she was cured for healed of blindness. It was all
Speaker 3: about healing. And then you start to see things.
Speaker 5: Like this.
Speaker 3: New kind of miracles. There is this still today. You
Speaker 3: will see people being very product The euchary is bled.
Speaker 3: The euchar is blood, and we have say we've blood
Speaker 3: that coagulates and decoagulates, and.
Speaker 5: Well it doesn't.
Speaker 1: There's one of those where they actually claim that Jesus
Speaker 1: is blood like you know, like it returns. And there
Speaker 1: was a priest who supposedly wrote a book because he
Speaker 1: did a DNA test on the blood. He was going
Speaker 1: to find out Jesus DNA from this.
Speaker 3: There were they will claim. You know, it's very old,
Speaker 3: that commune way. First you know that it's been attested
Speaker 3: for a very long time. But we know that they
Speaker 3: didn't have been used as zoom as bread. Yeah, after
Speaker 3: all the claims.
Speaker 5: That's a good point.
Speaker 3: So, yes, this fixational blood and I think ultimately when
Speaker 3: you talk about ron Catholic and I will end on that.
Speaker 2: You know, for the.
Speaker 3: For the weird devotion, people can feel at some point,
Speaker 3: you know, they can feel that, Okay, we're not seeing
Speaker 3: the glory of God. We are trying to marry more
Speaker 3: than anything else we are. We are not seeing as glorious.
Speaker 3: We're seeing Him as you know, in pain. There is
Speaker 3: statues with blood painting on it. The human aspect is
Speaker 3: very much brought forward because of course there is latent assurnism.
Speaker 3: It's a very mutagenic topma. You know, it's it can
Speaker 3: fly under the radar because you know, it's trinitarian. Christ
Speaker 3: is still God. But at the same time it allows
Speaker 3: for a lot of yeah, personal stuff.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a great point. Ultimately, Yeah, we want to
Speaker 1: highlight the Nestorian aspect of this, which is good.
Speaker 5: That's really good.
Speaker 3: And I when I go further on then Asturianism, and
Speaker 3: I'm gonna start a part in the Jesuit purely the Jesuits.
Speaker 3: I like to attribute you know, Messianic prophecies to other people.
Speaker 3: Basically everything about the rock in in the Old Testament
Speaker 3: will be a beer of.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're not fulfillments of Christ. It's everything is about
Speaker 1: Peter exactly.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you will have you know, the crushing the head
Speaker 3: of the snake, which is all about the Theotokos, not
Speaker 3: not the Messiah. And they even start to attribute themselves
Speaker 3: as the Jesuits prophecies. For example, there's a prophecy of
Speaker 3: yes Issaiah which says that I don't remember exactly if
Speaker 3: it's it's It says something about being nurtured by the
Speaker 3: state and Hu sucking on the breast of the gentiles,
Speaker 3: you know, the kingdoms and so on. And they said, yes,
Speaker 3: this isn't the book.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know the prophecy. I think it's I think
Speaker 1: it's as the forty two or forty five, and yeah,
Speaker 1: it talks about the conversion of kings to the church.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And they basically claim that this prophecy applies to
Speaker 3: them as the associat I used to buy itself because
Speaker 3: they they had friends in high places, because they were
Speaker 3: helped by the friends. This isn't the first the books
Speaker 3: that basically record the just with history of the first century,
Speaker 3: they're talking about all this. So they start to attribute
Speaker 3: prophecies to the company itself, which is very interesting, and
Speaker 3: we can see that really quickly it became a church
Speaker 3: inside the church. And for example, you will have them
Speaker 3: come to the University of Paris, which I mentioned before,
Speaker 3: and several times they would go into trial, you know,
Speaker 3: to to claim they basically claim university chairs and this
Speaker 3: is the University of Paris was like, okay, we can
Speaker 3: do that, but you need to specify what are you?
Speaker 3: Are you laity, are you a monk? Are you a priest?
Speaker 3: What's going on here? And they played on this. They
Speaker 3: played on the fact that the Jesuits are organized, there
Speaker 3: is a solid core and then there's everything that that's
Speaker 3: gravitating around it. And they would actually use these status
Speaker 3: you know, in many of their operations, and that's all.
Speaker 3: They will push people. They will push people in high
Speaker 3: places and sometimes they were not even they did not
Speaker 3: even have such adult of charge. And we can see
Speaker 3: that there were paper balls. So I'm gonna name the balls.
Speaker 3: It's Regimini Bilitantiscleasia, which is the first one exposit deby
Speaker 3: two and these two balls basically said that from none
Speaker 3: the Jesuits will have free reign whenever they come to
Speaker 3: a place. Uh, the bishop bishops have to conform to them.
Speaker 3: They cannot be excommunicated. They need to be listened to.
Speaker 3: When it comes to theology. They have the right to
Speaker 3: absolve people, so they basically they have the sussible to
Speaker 3: charge even when some of them are just lated. They're
Speaker 3: not priests. And you can see here one of the
Speaker 3: fulfillment of the Trulo Council, the Truelo Console for bids.
Speaker 3: You know, congregation congregations that are that are following specific rules,
Speaker 3: so orders of people and yes.
Speaker 5: Let's make that point. Let's make that point here.
Speaker 1: So Trollo the Quinness Council is important because it was
Speaker 1: accepted at Nicia too. So this is an earlier almost
Speaker 1: ecumenical council that eventually does get and receives ratification at
Speaker 1: NICEA two the seventh Ecamenical Council, and the Roman Catholics
Speaker 1: typically will admit that, but they'll just rebut by saying, oh,
Speaker 1: but the Pope, because of his supremacy, can go back
Speaker 1: through and pick out the fur four canons of Trollo
Speaker 1: that he doesn't like, and that's why they don't hold it.
Speaker 1: This because Trollo also says there should be married clergy,
Speaker 1: and the Roman Catholics respond by saying, well, yeah, but
Speaker 1: the Pope just decided that that's that's not true. So
Speaker 1: they're doing the same thing here with the religious orders.
Speaker 1: That's why there's not all these different crazy orders and Orthodoxy.
Speaker 1: There's no Franciscans and Carmelites and all that. There's just
Speaker 1: monastics or not.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, and yeah yeah. So basically, Trullo so that
Speaker 3: if you start to make orders the specific rules and
Speaker 3: people that are sworn to each other.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's like secret societies.
Speaker 3: Basically, it will end up in secret society. It basically
Speaker 3: said that since secret societies are crime already, let's make
Speaker 3: things that becomes secret society anathema. That's basically what said.
Speaker 3: So yes, so they started to organize them stuff, and
Speaker 3: they got a huge reach because that very specific method.
Speaker 3: So first of all, they came about in a time
Speaker 3: where you know, monastic orders were not doing so well.
Speaker 3: The Pope had finished these cruiseades against the mystics, and
Speaker 3: at the same time you had gone to Reformation coming in.
Speaker 3: So the Jesuits were very effective because there they were
Speaker 3: organized as an army Loyola used to be a military
Speaker 3: man as they took control of a lot of stuff.
Speaker 3: And for example, we have many many instances of them antagonizing,
Speaker 3: antagonizing the present population, even even through dogma. You know,
Speaker 3: the concelt of Trent was that. But as Jesuit and
Speaker 3: there is there is all these things to to push
Speaker 3: against the plant, to further the split between the Presistants
Speaker 3: and the Catholic That's when you see start to see
Speaker 3: like a lot of focus on the course because the
Speaker 3: president ate it and so on. It communicated in massacres.
Speaker 3: You have massacres for example in Portugal, whether the Jesuit
Speaker 3: would just come in antagonize the population, gets pre made
Speaker 3: absolution and just lead mobs of people to the Protestants.
Speaker 3: You have stuff like this in Poland. In Poland, there
Speaker 3: used to be this. In Poland was very Central Europe.
Speaker 3: There were between there were Catholic, but they were between
Speaker 3: the president German states and between Orthodox the Slavic Orthodox
Speaker 3: nations and that really great king. At some point we
Speaker 3: proclaimed religious freedom. I'm not saying Prestin is the school.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying we should not fight against it in
Speaker 3: any capacity, you know, especially from the Roman Catholic side
Speaker 3: of things. But this thing will proclaim Rich's freedom. And
Speaker 3: as soon as he died, the Jesuits started to push
Speaker 3: for I think it was Henry's Henry the third, so
Speaker 3: Duke of Andrew, and they excited him into just attacking
Speaker 3: and antagonizing Orthodox and president that when you see the path,
Speaker 3: the political path of Poland, but was still at this
Speaker 3: point because the antagonist the president and the Germans and
Speaker 3: the orthodox in the Russians, and you know, this nation
Speaker 3: later on was crushed several times between these two nations
Speaker 3: because of political actions like this, and even today, you know,
Speaker 3: you'll have a lot of you know, traads claiming, yeah,
Speaker 3: Poland is this very rad thing. It's it's a traditional
Speaker 3: Catholicism first of all, in the way they expressed their religiousity,
Speaker 3: it's kind of similar to Orthodoxy because a Slavic component,
Speaker 3: every Slavic, every slav people are to some exchange sons
Speaker 3: and daughters of Sarah and Methodius. And you know, Polish
Speaker 3: people should be proud of this because this actly destroys
Speaker 3: the country two times. There's actually had some good things
Speaker 3: going on before in terms of really stories. Yeah, it
Speaker 3: was even famously the only country which did nothing against
Speaker 3: the Jews. So the main idea is that anywhere the
Speaker 3: Jews the Jesuit would come, it would be a mess.
Speaker 1: And that a second well, this is interesting because this
Speaker 1: completely flips, you know, by the time of the twentieth
Speaker 1: century with John Courtney Murray and the Jesuits that were
Speaker 1: very influential at Vatican two.
Speaker 5: Uh, you know, even even the.
Speaker 1: Fake trad like Malachai Martin kind of he details all
Speaker 1: this at Vatican two and the different peritis periti that
Speaker 1: were consulting at Vatican two. Malchai Martin was consultant with
Speaker 1: Cardinal and then we have John Corney Murray being the
Speaker 1: champion of religious liberty and the idea of removing the
Speaker 1: notion of a confessional state. That was what he was
Speaker 1: the point man for that. He's even being lauded as
Speaker 1: you can see here and it's always backwards in American
Speaker 1: magazine as the champion of religious freedom. And this is
Speaker 1: why I have to stress one of the most important
Speaker 1: books if you want to understand traditional Catholicism Vatican two
Speaker 1: and understanding it from the Jesuit and the geopolitical angle,
Speaker 1: is the David Wimhoff book John Courtney Murray Time Life
Speaker 1: in the American Proposition. Now, I know this book is
Speaker 1: a little expensive, but it's actually worth having because it
Speaker 1: shows the CIA's doctrinal warfare program is where they allied
Speaker 1: with the Jesuits to steer the Roman Catholic Church, particularly
Speaker 1: at the time of Vatican Two and after Vatican Two,
Speaker 1: into being a tool of the Cold War to promote Americanism.
Speaker 1: So to promote Americanism, they needed a front up people
Speaker 1: within Roman Catholicism who were willing to go against the
Speaker 1: idea of a confessional state to champion religious liberty and freedom.
Speaker 1: Which is ironic because this sounds very contrary to you know,
Speaker 1: previous Vatican MASSI I mean Jesuit machinations, And it is ironic.
Speaker 1: And that's because and one can debate the whole meaning
Speaker 1: of the Jesuits over the centuries, but regardless, in the
Speaker 1: twentieth century they become the leaders of the revolution within
Speaker 1: the Roman Catholic sphere. And there's many reasons for that.
Speaker 1: There's older reasons that you've been pointing out. The deal
Speaker 1: with the kind of the implicit heresies and the implicit
Speaker 1: historianism and culturation that's present amongst the Jesuits, but at
Speaker 1: least in the twentieth century. What Wimhoff is documented in
Speaker 1: his book, and this is eight hundred pages of a
Speaker 1: thousand plus footnotes, as the traditional Catholic himself, he's documented
Speaker 1: the fact that this is quite literally a known CIA program,
Speaker 1: and the CIA program was successful in turning the Roman
Speaker 1: Catholic Church into a branch and arm of Americanism, and
Speaker 1: the Jesuits were at the forefront of that. That's very
Speaker 1: important to understand. So and by the way, I'm not
Speaker 1: saying that the Jesuits run the world. This is not
Speaker 1: This is not a book that's like kookie level conspiracy stuff.
Speaker 1: This is like actual intelligence level research stuff here.
Speaker 5: That's what wim Hoff's book is.
Speaker 1: Okay, it's nothing to do with black assassins of the
Speaker 1: underground layers of the Vatican. That's not what we're talking
Speaker 1: about here. We're talking about real, legit, hardcore documentation written
Speaker 1: by I believe Wimhoff is a lawyer. So he's obsessively
Speaker 1: documented this with with like a thousand footnotes, and it's
Speaker 1: a really solid piece of research. It's a huge key
Speaker 1: to understand the twentieth century in Vatican two. And I'm
Speaker 1: I'm this is somebody who coming from somebody wh used
Speaker 1: to be a traditional Catholic, who spent many years in
Speaker 1: that world devouring traditional Catholic books, from the SSPX to
Speaker 1: the FSSP, to Michael Davies to the Sada's to all those.
Speaker 1: I just devoured all that stuff.
Speaker 5: From many many years.
Speaker 1: I've even read the liberals like Xavier Wren, Paul Blanchard,
Speaker 1: I've read them all, and this is the best book
Speaker 1: to understand the geopolitical ramifications of Attican too.
Speaker 5: In the relationship to the Jesuits.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and actually I focused on them more ruthless. You know,
Speaker 3: ways to gain power in Europe, you know, because it
Speaker 3: is true sometimes they will even claim in their oath
Speaker 3: to be able to be kingmakers and where in the past.
Speaker 3: But you see that this idea of adapting to culture.
Speaker 3: It has been promoted, especially during the colonization era, because
Speaker 3: they were very important in terms of colonization. And you
Speaker 3: will have records of them going to the Indians, starting
Speaker 3: to play dress up as Indians.
Speaker 1: You will have who's the one that went to the
Speaker 1: Japanese member him he's well known for this, like the
Speaker 1: Japanese Jesuit guy and he's all dressed out like he's
Speaker 1: a freaking samurai.
Speaker 5: It's pretty funny.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't know the specifics, but the Jesuits are
Speaker 3: very famous, you know in Japan or in famous because
Speaker 3: during the period of civil wars, the single Guidi, there
Speaker 3: would be an influence and there will as spies, you know,
Speaker 3: basically they will travel VIP.
Speaker 1: The they were This is important point, thank you. Yes,
Speaker 1: they were the essentially functioned in part as spies for
Speaker 1: the Batican.
Speaker 5: This is a this is a key point.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And they would work with they would go on
Speaker 3: with the merchants and think like this, and you even
Speaker 3: see them engaging in industrial espionage. First of all, they
Speaker 3: would try to take away the competitive advantage of you know,
Speaker 3: Chinese people in Japanese people by and you know, stealing
Speaker 3: secrets of chinaware, you know, or to make chinaware, and
Speaker 3: they will actually you know, inform you know, the army,
Speaker 3: they will inform. The Purban band was a very particular
Speaker 3: case because during the period and the single there was
Speaker 3: this this fight against this Western influence. And after the
Speaker 3: period closed, the of theed operia started. So after this
Speaker 3: huge island wide civil war, there will be bands on
Speaker 3: Christianity specifically because they were seen as a bad influence.
Speaker 3: And even with that, the factor leader of Japan at
Speaker 3: the time, he basically whenever he learned that there were
Speaker 3: Christians that were not Catholics Jesuits, he will he would
Speaker 3: want to have them at the court. And you have
Speaker 3: the famous history of William Adams. William Adams was the
Speaker 3: British guy and as soon as go yes, Sir filnd
Speaker 3: that they were Christian which were not Jesuits, which were
Speaker 3: not this wrong influence on Japan, it would actually try
Speaker 3: to bring them in and William Adams actually but it
Speaker 3: didn't promote Christianity of course. But William Adams for example,
Speaker 3: was given the title of samurai and he could stay
Speaker 3: at the Emperial Court called the basis.
Speaker 5: Of that Goofy Tom Cruise movie.
Speaker 3: Is that what I remember that because that will be
Speaker 3: during the Boshing War, so that's later. But basically there
Speaker 3: was a British samurai and the only commerce that was
Speaker 3: done uh with the Europeans will be through Protestant Dutch
Speaker 3: at the time. So basically the over influence of the
Speaker 3: Jesuits just caused a lot of massacres of christian in Japan.
Speaker 3: Even the converse. There was this movie Silence, you've seen it.
Speaker 3: He talked basically the persecution of Christian and Japan and
Speaker 3: it's following just with missionaries would come even though the
Speaker 3: countries closed down.
Speaker 1: Oh Silence, No, no, I'm sorry, I get that mixed
Speaker 1: up with the one with the mission with Robert de
Speaker 1: Niro from like ten years earlier. But no, I know
Speaker 1: you're talking about, but I haven't seen Silence.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, you U should because well I'm not gonna
Speaker 3: spoil it then, but it's actually not. Yeah, you'll see
Speaker 3: the difference between when when the Japanese people, you know,
Speaker 3: the Christian convicts have to show faith and you know,
Speaker 3: prepare for mount to them, whereas where he has to
Speaker 3: face it. I'm pretty sure that would be a good
Speaker 3: movie review.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's a good idea.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, right on the team Jesuit foreign influence and yeah,
Speaker 3: so basically you have all this this, there's a very method.
Speaker 3: You will have them involved in evangelization of many places.
Speaker 3: You know in the Caribbean. You start to see verdu
Speaker 3: because there is this lenience around the I think it's
Speaker 3: like like Lady of Guadalupez. This is again it's it's
Speaker 3: a miracle that just tailored, you know, to to get
Speaker 3: things working politically. As the old Lady of Guadalupe was.
Speaker 3: Basically the idea is that, oh no, there there has
Speaker 3: been the apparition of an icon of the theotocus, but
Speaker 3: she was looking like the Aztec people, and basically a
Speaker 3: lot of the feminine Susstotal class adopted it there and
Speaker 3: today you can still see in Mexico there's like Santa Verte.
Speaker 1: And yeah, this is another point too. This is why
Speaker 1: Orthodox iconography never pictures Chinese Jesus Black Jesus, because it's
Speaker 1: very important did Jesus be the Hebrew Jesus that he
Speaker 1: was to fulfill the prophecy to be a descendant of David.
Speaker 1: So you can't do Chinese Jesus. Jesus was in Chinese,
Speaker 1: and that's why all the Orthodox iconographal iconographical presentations of
Speaker 1: the Saints always retain their historic qualities because we're not gnostics.
Speaker 1: Your lineage in your people group is important because as
Speaker 1: we see in the apocalypse, it's people out of every tribe, tongue,
Speaker 1: and nation that are called and you don't lose all
Speaker 1: of your historic physical qualities in the resurrection that's a
Speaker 1: gnostic doctrine. And that's why you can't Well, this again
Speaker 1: speaks to the Nestorianism, right, because if there can be
Speaker 1: Chinese Jesus, then Jesus historical instantiation as the Word of God.
Speaker 1: You know, in a single and hypostatized historical instantiation is relative.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and again you've got this idea of non exclusivity
Speaker 3: and diversification of the ocean, like every little people needs
Speaker 3: to have this pain you've got. This is adult miracles.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, right now we've got a lady Pho the Aztecs.
Speaker 3: Oh good. Yeah, and oh it's the end of World
Speaker 3: War two. We've got a lady for the piece in
Speaker 3: the world that really we will have old Mother of
Speaker 3: Soy soon enough, just give it a few years.
Speaker 1: A Mother of Soy said devotion of and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: old Lady of the new.
Speaker 5: All right, yeah, and you'll know. So notice here that.
Speaker 1: In the typical iconography of Christ, you'll see that the
Speaker 1: whole on that's these Greek letters are in the halo.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: Those are actually in the Byzantine iconography. Their references to
Speaker 1: the I am. And this is a statement that the
Speaker 1: same divine person who said I am that I am
Speaker 1: is who is the single divine person present here that
Speaker 1: you see. There's no created human hypostasis present. Christ is
Speaker 1: a fully human nature. But the human nature has for
Speaker 1: its hypostasis the divine person of the word alone.
Speaker 5: That's it.
Speaker 1: So that's why we are so stringent to avoid Nestorianism,
Speaker 1: is because we want to avoid all these errors. And
Speaker 1: that's why orthodox icronography always pictures Christ the same. You
Speaker 1: don't see an icon in Orthodoxy. Maybe in weird Roman
Speaker 1: Catholic stuff they'll make a Chinese Jesus or something, but
Speaker 1: you will always see Christ in having these features. There
Speaker 1: might be a little variance because of the styles of
Speaker 1: Russian iconography or Greek, but you'll notice he because he's
Speaker 1: a Hebrew. And if he's not the historic Hebrew Jesus,
Speaker 1: then the whole thing is nonsense.
Speaker 3: Yeah, correct, and okay to come back, Okay, what else
Speaker 3: can they say? Still, I want to point out against
Speaker 3: this idea that this group is working and it's always
Speaker 3: a bit nebuless. You don't really know who is the hardcore,
Speaker 3: who is the just the followers with laity with an
Speaker 3: actual priest, and they they are taking advantage of this
Speaker 3: you know, to infiltrate, and I'm when to go a
Speaker 3: bit further. First of all, it causes a lot of
Speaker 3: problem because you know the paper balls that I caught
Speaker 3: it basically said that I know you have laity that
Speaker 3: can perform sacraments, which is is such a total charge.
Speaker 3: What's the point of it. You've just dumb dumbing people
Speaker 3: or not performing for sacraments, even according to Catholic theology.
Speaker 3: But again about this organization, and I want to talk
Speaker 3: about more the the more modern chest with we see
Speaker 3: that they try to infiltrate a lot of things, and
Speaker 3: they and the first thing is actually totally to control
Speaker 3: over was a Vatican. So before there used to be
Speaker 3: the dog of the pope and now basically the pope
Speaker 3: is a Jesuit. There was this idea that you know,
Speaker 3: there is a black Pope and the white pup like
Speaker 3: the Pope and the black pup the law commander of
Speaker 3: the Jesuit general of the Juguit, and no, basically Francis
Speaker 3: is both. So right now you have the fusion of it,
Speaker 3: and you see that the very interesting relations between the
Speaker 3: papacy and between the Jesuits have come to fruition. So
Speaker 3: they will not listen to the purpe and be very
Speaker 3: pragmatic where wherever the pope was not working for them,
Speaker 3: and they will push your pop forward. They would prop
Speaker 3: him up when he was working for them. And at
Speaker 3: some point they even were disgrace you know, it was disbanded,
Speaker 3: but they still managed to come back. And right now
Speaker 3: the Purpo has absolute power and the Pope is a
Speaker 3: jest with and we have a lot of people talking. Yeah,
Speaker 3: maybe that's why Ratzinger was pushed aside. I'm not going
Speaker 3: to go into that, but no, we have to think
Speaker 3: because people who promoted all these areas, it's people who mean,
Speaker 3: we don't really know the dogma, we don't really know
Speaker 3: their relation to the occulture. We don't really know what
Speaker 3: is a final goal? Is it just power? And we
Speaker 3: have them at the highest position of the Catholic Church.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I want to make one little point
Speaker 1: to hear about the geopolitical stuff that I stumbled upon.
Speaker 1: So as most of you guys know, if you haven't
Speaker 1: heard the full Quigly talks, I also did the other
Speaker 1: important Quigley book, Angle American Establishment, and he actually talks
Speaker 1: about the Rothschilds and the Cecil Roads roundtable groups being
Speaker 1: kind of the power behind the throne. There's a fascinating
Speaker 1: section in Anglo American Establishment where quickly details that the
Speaker 1: power structure actually utilized the structure of the Jesuits to
Speaker 1: organize that secret society, if you were, call quickly refers
Speaker 1: to them as the Society of the elect.
Speaker 5: The Society the elect was.
Speaker 1: About the twelve most powerful European and British families Astors,
Speaker 1: raw Child, Cecil, Roads, et cetera. There was about ten
Speaker 1: or twelve of them, and then they had an out
Speaker 1: that was the inner core, the inner party. You could say,
Speaker 1: they had an outer portico of what they called two
Speaker 1: or three thousand helpers that was people recruited at Cambridge, Oxford, Eton.
Speaker 1: This is who's running the British empire. Basically this is
Speaker 1: the model for the American empire. Right, so the American
Speaker 1: Empire does sort of morph out of this because the CFR,
Speaker 1: the trial out or commission, what's the power structure in
Speaker 1: the US that was all set up by these people.
Speaker 1: So some of those families are not as important as
Speaker 1: maybe they were one hundred years ago when Quigley was
Speaker 1: writing about them, But regardless, it's still roughly the same
Speaker 1: power structure, and they specifically said they modeled their inner
Speaker 1: society on the j Justus. So once again, let's keep
Speaker 1: in mind, this is the same power structure as the
Speaker 1: Royal Society. That's who the Anglo American establishment is, same
Speaker 1: group the Royal Society, who are the biggest promoters of
Speaker 1: Darwinism and evolution in the last one hundred plus years.
Speaker 5: Them and who else the Jesuits. There you go.
Speaker 1: I want to stress this, and I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: I can prove definitively that, oh, well, secretly the Royal
Speaker 1: Society was allied with the Jesuits.
Speaker 5: Maybe maybe not.
Speaker 1: I'm sure eventually people could probably dig that up. But
Speaker 1: what I am saying is that I don't think that
Speaker 1: it's an accident, and I do think it's interesting that
Speaker 1: these two global power groups, both the elite of the
Speaker 1: British Empire and the Jesuits, were so formative and instrumental
Speaker 1: in putting all of their power and influence into promoting
Speaker 1: Big Bang and Darwinism and all the frauds of pilt
Speaker 1: Down Man and Nebraska Man and all that stuff. Tahart
Speaker 1: is there for all that stuff, Jesuits have been very
Speaker 1: influential on this, and I think that has to be
Speaker 1: kept in mind and stressed, as you pointed out, because
Speaker 1: now what we see is the entire Roman Catholic structure
Speaker 1: being run by a Jesuit.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and that would be probably my conclusion. And the
Speaker 3: Jesuit is that even from the Roman Catholic perspective, there's
Speaker 3: a big problem here is that the idea of the Pope,
Speaker 3: the idea of Catholic of theology, and the concept of Trent,
Speaker 3: this is done by and through the Jesuits. And even
Speaker 3: after that, the Jesuits were you know, allies, enemies in
Speaker 3: any way, very bad force for Roman Catholicism. You know,
Speaker 3: it introduced heresies, it's fought against the Pope, and this
Speaker 3: is not acceptable in Roman Catholic dogma. The problem is
Speaker 3: the enemy was in your mist and now you can
Speaker 3: truly be a Catholic and you know, hold very adversarial
Speaker 3: positions to the Jesuits, but at the same time you
Speaker 3: can't really follow the dogma and follow the Jesuits. So
Speaker 3: you kind have blocked here. It's been infiltrated. Yes, And
Speaker 3: I also want to to say a quick word to
Speaker 3: the Orthodox. As I described the Jesuit work you know,
Speaker 3: as a core and then affiliates which sometimes are not
Speaker 3: even you know, fully fledged Jesuits, allies and things like this,
Speaker 3: and they are working for the same thing. And now
Speaker 3: we should look at the Fordamites because they they are
Speaker 3: Jesuit affiliates to work for the Fordham University, which is
Speaker 3: a Jesuit university, and they push the same stuff as
Speaker 3: they as a Jesuits.
Speaker 1: And there are Legiance that's also a CIA university exactly.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and basically you see like arcam like is this
Speaker 3: is this equivalent order you know to the Jesuits that
Speaker 3: start to pop up. You have priests in there, but
Speaker 3: at the same time you're pating even they push for
Speaker 3: with stuff and sometimes they go like borderline heresy, lot
Speaker 3: of daments, you know, there are also we should we
Speaker 3: should look uh, we should look at this because it
Speaker 3: seems to take the same road. And and yes, this
Speaker 3: this is with the the new tool of suest with
Speaker 3: which is over ecmmunism, you know, ecumunism and this idea
Speaker 3: of dissolution that right now we can approach all the
Speaker 3: things that we're not gonna fight, we're not gonna mix it,
Speaker 3: we're gonna bring things forward and just try to get
Speaker 3: our differences out, which all differences are to the dogma
Speaker 3: or faith, which is something very important to just start,
Speaker 3: you know, merging into this pro mode of thing like yes,
Speaker 3: this big blood religion, world religion, and and that's what
Speaker 3: we're going to see. With the Amazon synos. They will
Speaker 3: basically say things like, yes, of course he can worship Tree,
Speaker 3: but you know, in a way, Tree is also God,
Speaker 3: and and this is this is the whole creation, and
Speaker 3: there is no it's all toophorical, and that's what he's
Speaker 3: gonna end. Really, So yes, we should think about this
Speaker 3: because this is a new methods with.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I think they're going to be instrumental in
Speaker 1: promoting the you know, new world order type religion that
Speaker 1: Francis seems to be very keen to. In fact, he
Speaker 1: was just saying this week that it's time to create
Speaker 1: a new global humanist religion. Now I'm going to really
Speaker 1: blow your mind here everybody in the chat, just as
Speaker 1: a kind of a weirdo thing to finish off with.
Speaker 1: Probably some of you intrepid researchers out there can figure
Speaker 1: this one out for me. But this came up many
Speaker 1: years ago when we were doing a call with John
Speaker 1: and Chris. There is a very weird Jesuit cave uh
Speaker 1: and it's called the underground. Underground Jesuit caves in Europe
Speaker 1: that are and they're filled with Egyptian, Islamic and cartoon art.
Speaker 5: I am not joking.
Speaker 1: It's just outside the city of Mastricht in Belgium and
Speaker 1: it's known as a Jesuit cave.
Speaker 5: I'm not joking.
Speaker 1: There's the link in the chat underground Caves and the
Speaker 1: artwork throughout these Jesuit caves. I know this sounds crazy,
Speaker 1: it's real includes cartoon characters. Now why, I don't know.
Speaker 1: Maybe somebody can figure this out intrepid researchers. I suspect
Speaker 1: I can't prove this, but to me, it's reminiscent of
Speaker 1: sort of. It looks like mind control type stuff. It
Speaker 1: looks like the things that you would do if you
Speaker 1: were doing hallucinogens, that you might show people.
Speaker 5: But maybe not.
Speaker 1: Maybe they're just bored and drawing cartoon scenes on walls.
Speaker 1: I'm not joking.
Speaker 5: I'm going to show you the art here again.
Speaker 1: Anybody who knows what this is, please enlighten me, because
Speaker 1: I have no idea but as you can see that,
Speaker 1: here are the cartoon characters on one scene. There's multiple
Speaker 1: scenes like this, really really weird stuff, literal cartoon characters.
Speaker 1: And I don't know when this one was drawn. They've
Speaker 1: been drawn, I guess in different centuries. This was drawn
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixty. Here's your Jesuit Disney cartoonist. It includes
Speaker 1: a giant Egyptian snakehead. Here's some more cartoon characters with
Speaker 1: puppy dogs, bring puppy dogs, bringing dinner, talking daffy ducks.
Speaker 1: I mean, are they just tripping out? Are the Jesuits
Speaker 1: just tripping a bunch of acid underneath.
Speaker 5: Underneath the city.
Speaker 1: But it gets weirder and weirder because they also have
Speaker 1: other religious imagery, such as.
Speaker 5: Buddha.
Speaker 1: Anyway, it's in the essay.
Speaker 5: You can that article.
Speaker 1: It appears, as far as I could tell, to be
Speaker 1: a real thing. Jesuits were past masters in copying world
Speaker 1: famous arts and structures. There's even a version of Picasso's
Speaker 1: Old Woman in here. Why were they doing copies in
Speaker 1: an underground cave?
Speaker 5: I don't know.
Speaker 1: This is just really bizarre stuff, So just a weird
Speaker 1: one I wanted to throw in for everybody jesuit cartoon art.
Speaker 1: So if you want to leave us some super chats
Speaker 1: as we sort of come here towards the end.
Speaker 3: Yeah, sure, I just wanted to tell you that. Okay,
Speaker 3: so jesuits is not my preferred topics. So in the future,
Speaker 3: if we want to talk more about this, we actually
Speaker 3: have people from the same collective who actually studied this
Speaker 3: more and we could go a bit deeper and probably
Speaker 3: go more into the occal side of things. I didn't
Speaker 3: really want to go there, but to bring a little
Speaker 3: bit more nuance, and in the future it might it
Speaker 3: might be possible. We have other people who are Yeah, I'm.
Speaker 1: Not really trying to go into that. I just wanted
Speaker 1: to mention it because it came to mind. I didn't
Speaker 1: want to forget the weird underground cave with cartoons. I
Speaker 1: just I couldn't resist mentioning that.
Speaker 3: But if you're interested in digging further, we have other
Speaker 3: people who are very very much qualified and.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, so I want to make a point there
Speaker 1: that if you want to connect with Snack, his discord
Speaker 1: is listed there. The French Orthobos have their own discord.
Speaker 1: They do a lot of apologetic and translation discussion.
Speaker 5: Work in there.
Speaker 1: There's his YouTube channel, a lot of that's in French,
Speaker 1: and then also his Twitter and he's pretty active on Twitter,
Speaker 1: so you can connect with his material there.
Speaker 5: Anybody wants to support us, I'll do some super chats here.
Speaker 1: We only got one superchat right now, Lawrence asked, does
Speaker 1: anyone want to match my superchat?
Speaker 5: Well, yeah, there you go, thank you.
Speaker 1: We do got a good car out of two hundred
Speaker 1: and thirty five nerds in here, so I'm glad to
Speaker 1: hear everybody real quick. I'll read some of the devotions
Speaker 1: of Faustina Kowalska that we've critiqued here. Vine Mercy in
Speaker 1: my soul. She says that the host floated out of
Speaker 1: the tabernacle and rested in my hands. Later on in
Speaker 1: that book, page eighty nine, she says, while I was
Speaker 1: holding the host in my hands, I felt the amazing
Speaker 1: Jesus power upon me.
Speaker 5: By the way, you're not.
Speaker 1: Supposed to hold the host, right, it's supposed to be
Speaker 1: given to you by the priests. But anyway, and traditionally
Speaker 1: speaking right, but it floated to her.
Speaker 3: What's funny is that you've got Roman Catholic being very
Speaker 3: you know, like pushing, you know, Alacoq and people like exist.
Speaker 3: But you have some some of the traditional Catholics, like
Speaker 3: I mean he said actist, right, I don't know traditional
Speaker 3: that is, for example, there's a demon. Brothers. Yes, this
Speaker 3: devotion of kovaska is is wrong for all the reason
Speaker 3: we quote it. But the problem is it also applies
Speaker 3: to other devotions like a la coq.
Speaker 1: Exactly once you critique this is a great point U Kouska.
Speaker 1: On these points, the same thing will apply to a bunch.
Speaker 5: Of these women saints.
Speaker 1: And I want to admit mention too, a gemma who
Speaker 1: threw herself down a well. Yes, I know that some
Speaker 1: asthetics have gotten pretty radical and maybe mortified their their
Speaker 1: body in a sense that that would be extreme. That's
Speaker 1: different than being suicidal and throwing yourself down a well.
Speaker 1: And if you read for Catholics, I would challenge you
Speaker 1: read the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Donatus.
Speaker 5: I read.
Speaker 1: I reread it again actually a few months ago, and
Speaker 1: it was very instructive because I had forgotten, because I've
Speaker 1: read all the Antidonatus works by Augustine, I'd forgotten the
Speaker 1: fact that the Donatists actually did this. And Augustine condemns
Speaker 1: them for this, the Donatists would throw themselves down wells,
Speaker 1: and he specifically talks about that. It comes up in
Speaker 1: the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Donatis. So what what
Speaker 1: I'm getting at is that this manifestation of devotion is
Speaker 1: not of God. It's heretical, it's prelest. Anyway, she goes
Speaker 1: on in her treatise to vine Mercy to say that
Speaker 1: Jesus told her personally, I want my specific mercy to
Speaker 1: be worshiped. If they will not adore my mercy, I
Speaker 1: will punish the whole world. I'm uniting myself with you,
Speaker 1: as with no other creature. This is the nestorianism that
Speaker 1: you talked about. If you pray, I will bless the
Speaker 1: whole world. I will punish the whole world. Tell your superior,
Speaker 1: superior general world that you are the most faithful nun
Speaker 1: in the whole order, you are the greatest saint.
Speaker 5: Blah blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: There's all this nonsense, and you realize that this is
Speaker 1: this is not this is all total pre list. And
Speaker 1: if you were to admit that that's all total pre list,
Speaker 1: then all of these same women that we've been talking
Speaker 1: about and it's not just women. There's other weird men
Speaker 1: that did similar stuff. It would apply to all them too.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I just did I just wrote
Speaker 1: that essay on the prophets of bail, and it made
Speaker 1: me think of Elijah and the prophets of bail. Right,
Speaker 1: cutting yourself and all this kind of stuff is exactly
Speaker 1: what Elijah faces with the profits bail j C.
Speaker 5: Rubug ten bucks. He says, thank you.
Speaker 1: Both, very many blessings for your hard work.
Speaker 5: Well, thank you, Jesse, appreciate that. And do you have
Speaker 5: any comments on that?
Speaker 3: Well?
Speaker 1: Thanks, No, I'm in on what I was saying about
Speaker 1: Kowalska and the.
Speaker 5: And that stuff.
Speaker 3: Yeah. The thing is, you know, no, it seems apparent.
Speaker 3: You know, people start start to realize that's what we
Speaker 3: have to tell. Because people start to think for themselves,
Speaker 3: it's easier to get informations out and and you know,
Speaker 3: we can we can start to understand. You know, all
Speaker 3: these things were hidden. You know, these are the fact
Speaker 3: that things were explicit in the story and the pop
Speaker 3: actually knew about it, but it was never brought forward
Speaker 3: fair enough. For example, the pop news that the Holy
Speaker 3: Heart Sacred heard and that Loyola who were pushing for
Speaker 3: an Estianism, but it was hidden letter the holy what
Speaker 3: sacred hurt?
Speaker 5: Oh, sacred heart?
Speaker 1: Okay, I think it's a sacred herb.
Speaker 5: Would say, the sacred herb.
Speaker 1: Dude, it sounded like you said sacred herb like Rastafarian.
Speaker 3: Yeah, okay, what do you okay? So ruffling Stack said,
Speaker 3: what do you have to say about just with liberation theology?
Speaker 3: This is another had hog dogma, you know, the same
Speaker 3: thing they would have ad doc dogma to integrate people.
Speaker 3: This is, I believe part of the political movements in
Speaker 3: South Southern America, South America, and and yes it was.
Speaker 3: It was created to to to to adapt. It's it's
Speaker 3: another adult dogma.
Speaker 5: Basically, you want to read the wim Hoff book.
Speaker 1: I've read that.
Speaker 5: It's good.
Speaker 1: Again, I'm stressing it because we want to understand there's
Speaker 1: a mythology amongst the trad anti communist collective. I'm joking
Speaker 1: the trad anti commy world where they are under the
Speaker 1: impression that the liberation theology was a communist thing that
Speaker 1: the Jesuits pioneered. There's an angle and element of truth
Speaker 1: to this, but it's also way off because it buys
Speaker 1: into the Cold War dialectic, and wim Hoff is great
Speaker 1: at busting that Cold War dialectic because I want to
Speaker 1: stress that the main pioneers of liberation theology. Yes, there
Speaker 1: are many liberal Jesuits and liberalty elogians who did that,
Speaker 1: but they were doing that at the behest, not of Moscow,
Speaker 1: not of the KGB, but at the hest of their
Speaker 1: zillionaire banking Western elites that funded them. And wim Hoff
Speaker 1: grasps that. So he's a great myth buster to many
Speaker 1: of these tracks. And that's why this book is so good. Also,
Speaker 1: I want to stress too, a cult Renaissance church, if
Speaker 1: you read a cult Renaissance Church of Rome and you
Speaker 1: read the whim Hoff book, you will have most of
Speaker 1: your trad myths busted from the geopolitical and historic perspective.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, I've heard of it. Do you give you
Speaker 3: to read?
Speaker 1: So that's what I wanted to say Raffling Stakes, is
Speaker 1: that those books are really good and sort of busting
Speaker 1: a lot of these these this trad mythology like that
Speaker 1: AA one O two five that's actually just cold war propaganda,
Speaker 1: this idea that that Moscow is sending all of these
Speaker 1: KGB agents to infiltrate the papacy and all this stuff.
Speaker 1: The papacy was already corrupt, The papacy was already a
Speaker 1: problem way before Moscow was struggling with its atheism. So
Speaker 1: you have to understand the problems go back way beyond
Speaker 1: the twentieth cent This is Vatican Two is the outworking
Speaker 1: of centuries and centuries and centuries of issues and errors.
Speaker 1: It's not something that just pops up in the twentieth
Speaker 1: century after a pious the twelveth suddenly starts to you know,
Speaker 1: accept theistic evolution, and oh suddenly it's the infiltration of
Speaker 1: the the Freemasons. Right, that's an element, there's an element
Speaker 1: of truth to that. But again, there are problems that
Speaker 1: go back for the Even Malachi Martin in his Jesuit
Speaker 1: book admits the problem of the Jesuits, and he was
Speaker 1: a fake trad. Even the fake trads can know that
Speaker 1: the Jesuits are a huge part of the problem. And
Speaker 1: then it extends back even further than just the twentieth century.
Speaker 5: Do you have any more.
Speaker 1: No, I mean, do you have any more information or
Speaker 1: anything else you want to touch on before we kind
Speaker 1: of wrap it up. BELLA. Dodd That's what I was
Speaker 1: trying to say. No, no, I'm not saying that Bella
Speaker 1: Dodd's congressional testimony is fake. I'm not saying that Bella Dodd, though,
Speaker 1: is putting out information. And a lot of the Cold
Speaker 1: warrior people really thought that the enemy was the KGB
Speaker 1: in Moscow. But that is a faux enemy, is what
Speaker 1: I'm trying to stress to you, And even the Trads
Speaker 1: are starting to finally figure this out. It's not the
Speaker 1: KGB that's bringing in the new world order, it's the
Speaker 1: Fortune one hundred. What I'm trying to tell you is
Speaker 1: that the threat of communism in America was largely a
Speaker 1: fake threat. The real threat was the Fortune one hundred,
Speaker 1: who wanted the Cold War to transition us into the
Speaker 1: period where we are now. That's why I've done a
Speaker 1: thirty plus book analysis of the globalist writings of the
Speaker 1: last century which shows this point. So it's not the
Speaker 1: communists versus the West. It's the international elite who are
Speaker 1: corporate who are bringing in this technocracy. That's the real plan.
Speaker 1: And Francis and all his clown crew all part of
Speaker 1: bringing in this new world ordered religion. They're the religious
Speaker 1: arm of this same plan.
Speaker 5: It's that simple.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a continuation that a lot of people are
Speaker 3: going to say that everything went wrong at the Vatican too.
Speaker 3: It's a long work. And yeah, as a papacy at
Speaker 3: the internet flows with them dogmatic in e canciology. He
Speaker 3: started very early and like we've covered I's suestment, we've
Speaker 3: covered hundreds of years of history, that single good one.
Speaker 1: Yeah and yeah, all right, well, thank you for those
Speaker 1: super chats there again, if you want to support his work,
Speaker 1: I've got the links there in the show description, and
Speaker 1: if you want to support Jay's analysis, you can subscribe
Speaker 1: at my website, buy my books signed copies in the shop.
Speaker 1: You can also join at the joint button. If you're
Speaker 1: on a macro PC or you you can you can
Speaker 1: just like and share. That's much appreciated as well. We're
Speaker 1: going to see a lot of algorithmic changes on YouTube
Speaker 1: in the coming months, so it helps of course to
Speaker 1: to like and to share the shows. All right, thank
Speaker 1: you Snach. This was a fascinating, excellent conversation for people
Speaker 1: who want to get a little more of the central
Speaker 1: point about the differences in devotion. There's the excellent Jean
Speaker 1: Claus'll called Larchet book on the difference between the two
Speaker 1: churches in terms of the devotion. And then, of course
Speaker 1: I would just say again for anybody who wants a
Speaker 1: brief treatment of the of the theology and how the
Speaker 1: theology it leads to the differences of practices and the practice,
Speaker 1: read the debate between Palamas and a barley mite. That's
Speaker 1: only I did a whole talk on it a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks ago. It's only about one hundred pages. And
Speaker 1: he even touches on the the differences of devotions that
Speaker 1: were that were already becoming a parent back in his
Speaker 1: century when he was debating the barley of mine and
Speaker 1: the barley of mine is essentially just another kind of
Speaker 1: roughly the tonistic type of position.
Speaker 5: Roughly speaking, all.
Speaker 1: Right, thank you Snach, great show, great talk, much appreciated
Speaker 1: for all your information. Thank you everybody in the chat
Speaker 1: and all the nerds, great show. Anything else you want
Speaker 1: to say, I.
Speaker 3: Know, thank you for having me, and will be available
Speaker 3: if you want to go further on some topics, So
Speaker 3: if you want to look at other things, and yeah,
Speaker 3: keeping posted for the movie review about Silence, I would
Speaker 3: really like to have your opinion.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 5: I'm glad you reminded me of it.
Speaker 1: There's so many movies I need to get to, but
Speaker 1: all right, God bless everybody, have a good night.