Patient indeed has been the Church’s enemy who lacks the ability to conquer by brute force. What could not be accomplished by the crude slaughter of the Baptized of antiquity, would have to be drawn out more slowly through swindle and through slander, through heresy and harlotry, until finally the visible membership of the only Church of Divine origin would open wide its faculties for teaching, governing and sanctifying to accept the bit and bridle of the Synagogue of Satan, and therefrom be led around the circus as ridiculous pet, and by a clownish, degenerate anti-pope. Much has been said by the stewards of internet Tradition about the Arian catastrophe’s similarity to the present and seeming apocalypsis. But there is one overwhelming fact that is never mentioned. Has this fact been ignored or concealed, and why?
The Plot Against the Church was written in German and Spanish in 1962 by a group of clergymen writing collectively under the pseudonym Maurice Pinay, and later translated. Revised in 1967, the work was produced as a measure of resistance to the revolutionary overthrow of Catholic minded leadership which took place near the outset of Vatican II. Although the book can be found by Catholics who are relentless in their quest to understand more fully the apostatic psychopathy of Bergoglio, and the bewildering acceptance thereof by Catholics; we ought not be surprised at its being ignored by the self-selected arbiters of acceptable Catholic discourse.
One of the book’s key points is its documentation of a recurring phenomenon whose origin is as old as the Church herself: the problem of the false convert, a difficulty which arose with peculiar frequency among many Jews who accepted baptism, especially when Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire and subsequent kingdoms. The false convert would, according to both Catholic and Judaic historians, while outwardly manifesting the signs and behaviors of one baptized, nonetheless practice his former religion in secret. The sons of such converts would repeat the cycle, receiving publicly the Sacraments of initiation and Catholic catechesis, but privately blaspheming the Savior (that He is the son of a prostitute, damned to hell and up to His ears in boiling excrement) and internalizing Mishnah, the gnostic oral tradition which would centuries later be set in writing as the first part of the Babylonian Talmud. Very little time would be required for such false converts to enter the clergy and form an enemy fifth column within the bosom of the Church herself.
Such insincere conversions provide a tremendous opportunity for the Church’s enemies, especially those who take (or rather, steal) Holy Orders, because by studying Catholic doctrine such robber priests can probe for opportunities to undermine it by way of heresy. Needless to say, this tactic was neither novel at Vatican II, nor was it young with the near-election to the Papacy of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro in 1903, nor even with the tacit acceptance of usury by a certain Renaissance Pope. To see one of the earliest manifestations of a false Judaic convert-cleric laying waste to the visible Church, we must go all the way back to the fourth Century and a certain priest by the name of Arius, originator of the infamous Heresy.
The authors of The Plot Against the Church cite well-known Catholic historian William Thomas Walsh, and summarize as follows the life and heresy of the crypto-Jew Arius in a way that reminds the Catholic reader of a critical fact which not only the all-hallowed Council, but the contemporary custodians of Tradition have conveniently forgotten.
Born in North Africa, young Arius emerged on the scene as the follower of a schismatic, and later repented when that cause suffered setbacks. He then took Holy Orders under the Bishop of Alexandria and garnered prestige for his preaching, asceticism and apparently had a mystical aura as well.
The basic principle of the Arian doctrine was the Jewish thesis of the absolute unity of God, denying the Trinity and representing Christ solely as the most exalted of all creatures, but in no way as possessing divine nature. This was one of the first serious attempts to provide Christianity with a Jewish stamp. (Pinay 212)
The authorship of Pinay continues that Arius’s pious reputation aided in his heretical preaching and its delivery method, which was comprised in lavishing on the name of Christ the highest praise that any man ever has, and ever will merit. Thus the Heretic
allowed his poison to seep in with the cunning denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ, since it is the point which encounters the most stiff-necked rejection by the Jews. (Ibid.)
This denial-through-praise for Christ as mere man is precisely what occurs to unsuspecting Christians who enter the Lodges today. The authors further note that Arius attempted to innovate upon the Church’s stance against the Jews by mitigating Her Founder’s Divine condemnation against those who stubbornly reject Christ. Hmm… the old covenant still valid, do we hear such pablum being spewed today? Such an attempt at reforming the Church’s stance vis-à-vis the Jews also bears remarkable affinity to the motivation behind the damnably ambiguous Nostra Aetate, and bears out what ought to be axiomatic: that the Synogogue’s playbook never changes.
Following this, and likewise right out of the unchanging playbook came the use of media of the day: Arius produced books and pamphlets in attempting to subvert the prelates into his desired mode of thinking. Yet again out of both the ancient and modern field manuals of infiltration through corrupt ideas, even if unsuccessful in winning converts came Arius’s successful attempts to cloud the issue as a mere theological dispute among brethren. This minimizing feint deceived Emperor Constantine as to the gravity of the threat posed to Holy Mother from within, and led him to seek a resolution of conciliation between Catholic Bishop Alexander and Arius himself. -Sounds a lot like the personal accompaniment and encounter excrement peddled by the conciliar religion: dialogue between light and darkness, good should meet evil half-way. Pinay comments on this method of infiltrator as benign actor
this is worthy of being remarked, since it is the classical technique with which the Jews begin a revolutionary movement. Upon many occasions they give themselves out to be harmless, good-willed, of small influence and without any kind of danger, so that the institutions threatened by the revolutionary germ do not allot to the latter its true importance and therefore look away from applying their whole force against it, which is imperative if it is to be rapidly and effectively destroyed.
Lulled through this outward conduct, the Christian or Gentile leading personages are accustomed to avoid such measures, by reacting in a modest way. This is utilised by Jewry, in order to treacherously kindle the conflagration, so that, when combative measures are finally resolved upon, it already possesses such an overwhelming force that it is impossible to halt it. (Ibid.)
At the synod in Alexandria, Bishop Alexander excommunicated Arius in 321, who immediately sought to bolster support for himself in Palestine, in close proximity to the Bishop of Nicomedia, the Heretic’s aide-de-camp
It is illuminating that it was Palestine where, in spite of the repressive measures of Titus and Hadrian, the most compact Jewish population was found, and where the “Jewish Fifth Column”, which had infiltrated into the Church, was very powerful. It is therefore not strange that Arius, declared outlawed through excommunication and in a desperate position, sought his salvation in flight, in order to seek support with his brothers in Palestine. He was so successful in this intention that an entire Synod of Bishops and high-ranking clergy, as was the Synod of Palestine, decided upon support of him and gave new power and prestige to his cause, which, after its condemnation by the Synod of Alexandria, seemed condemned to failure. (Ibid., 213.)
Now that he was in the company and material support of fellow tribesmen and untrue converts, Arius could quickly convene a non-canonical synod for himself and attempt to gain a patina of legitimacy. Right on cue, the Synod of Nicomedia provided Arius authority to return to Egypt, thus an anti-synod contradicted the Catholic Church under the flag of false legitimacy. – Flagrantly contradicting validity through the use of pretended authority, have we seen that recently? The defiant Synods of Nicomedia and Palestine, however, were only the opening salvo of the tried and true, ancient-yet-new, classic divide and conquer scheme, because wherever the Synod of Alexandria held sway, the Arians would stridently raise the spectre of the rulings at Nicomedia and Palestine. Furthermore, bribes and inducements could be set out to reward supporters, while slander and intrigue would be meted out to opponents. On and on the contagion spread
Arius and the Arianist Bishops intrigued against the clergy who defended Holy Church. They persecuted and feuded against them and even attacked the venerable Bishops and all priests, without regard for their rank, who had appeared to the fore through their zeal in the defence of Catholicism. They persecuted and fought them by means of secret and poisonous intrigues and by means of false accusations, until they were rendered harmless or destroyed.
By means of a well-organised action the Arians on their side strove to bring under their control the Bishops’ offices when they fell vacant, and they were successful in occupying them with clergy of their own way of thinking and of preventing true Catholics from finding admittance to this office.
These infamous manoeuvres were set in motion above all after the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea. At this council Arius and his heresy were condemned in spite of the opposition of a minority of heretical bishops, who participated with them in the Council and who vainly attempted to bring about the victory of their viewpoints which were just as novel and contrary to the traditional Catholic doctrine as those which some bishops wish to make prevail at the present Ecumenical Council of Vatican II. (Ibid., 214.)
Could this Arian pattern entailing infiltration, co-optation and overthrow have a parallel in our day?
- Persecuting faithful clergy from within (check!)
- Capturing vacant sees for heretics (check!)
- Catholic doctrine nullified through disobedient day-to-day practice (checkity-check!!)
-And the ancient heresy was all the work of a crypto-Judaic fifth columnist and his fellow-travelers. Isn’t it telling how the Conciliar religion’s leashed and muzzled controlled opposition has no trouble talking about the world groaning and waking to find itself Arian, yet never once before now, in years of seeking authentic Catholicism online have I come across the infamous Heretic’s true origin. This leads to the question: what have we yet to discover about the originators of the Conciliar religion and their episcopal descendants? Let’s look round at the observations of some authentic Catholic lay brethren.
At least the Fourth Century Catholics groaned and awakened; we Twenty-First Century Catholics just whimper in our sleep.
Pinay, Maurice. The Plot Against the Church. 1962. Online Edition.