+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

Date post: 07-Jul-2018
Category:
Upload: jan-miller
View: 216 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend

of 8

Transcript
  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    1/18

    n 1094 A.D. a son and heir was born into a propertied family of noble birth named O'Morgair   in Armagh, in what is now Northern Ireland. The male child was baptized Maelmhaedhoc. In later years, when he was placed under the tutorship of Imbar O'Haganin the Abby at Armagh for hisformal schooling, Maelmhaedhoc's name would be Latinized, and he would become known

    as Malachy. He was ordained in 1119 AD at the age of 25. He continued his theological education inLismore. Malachy, was ordained as Abbot of Bangor in 1123. A year later he was consecrated as the

     Archbishop of Connor.

    In 1127 he became "father confessor" to Cormac MacCarthy, Prince of Desmond (who would later become the King of Ireland). In 1132 he was promoted to the primacy of Armagh. Malachy died onhis second pilgrimage to Rome in 1148. He was canonized by Pope Clemente III  on July 6, 1199.

    Interestingly, among Malachy's prophesies was his prediction of the day and hour of his own death—

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    2/18

    and it was accurate. Most important of all of his prophesies was one concerning the succession of thePopes—from Pope Innocent II (who became pontiff in 1140) to the pope who will follow John Paul II—Pope Benedict XVI, the last Catholic pontiff. According to Malachy, the line of popes would end,abruptly, with Benedict. Of course, we know Pope Benedict resigned the papacy on Feb. 29, 2013and the College of Cardinals elected Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the archbishop of Buenos

     Aires, Argentina Pope Francis I on March 13, 2013.

    Pope Francis became the first Jesuit to become the head of the Catholic Church. And the firstmarxist. And, the first non-European pope since 741 AD. And the first pope from the southernhemisphere—ever.The Malachy Prophecy specifically detailed the origin of the 110th pope as beingPolish in Eastern Europe. That would be John Paul II. As the Malachy Prophecy  is carefullyexamined, it is accurate to this point. There remains only one pontiff in the Malachy Prophecyafter Pope John Paul II—Petrus Romanus.. If you add the Benedictine prophecy, described

    as Petrus Romanus, there are two. But, the Benedictine addition is not part of the original prophesyand, therefore, does not belong although it perfectly describes the ascension of Cardinal JosephRatsinger   to the papacy. Pope Benedict XVI was elected by the political conclave in Rome.

    Peter of Rome (Petrus Romanus) is an acknowledgment of the theological power struggle that tookplace in 2005 since the Cardinals did not want to go outside of Europe for a replacement for JohnPaul II. At the same time, Petrus Romanus, or Peter of Romesuggests that the final pontiff necessarily had to be an Italian. Pope Francis was born in Argentina and is, therefore, an

     Argentinean. But, he is also one of five children of Italian immigrants. While no pontiff has ever takenthe name "Peter ," conspiracy buffs are quick to point out that Jorge Mario Bergoglio took the nameof Francis of Assis(the patron saint of animals). Francis of Assis' real name wasGiovanni di PietroBernardone. The conspiracy crowd doesn't hesitate to take a major leap by noting that Giovanni'smiddle name was Pietro, or Peter, thereby connecting Francis I  to St. Peter . But, it's a stretch thatreaches no where. My father's birth name wasFrancis  (or Frank). Does that mean my father hassome sort of an indirect link to Peter  (whose real name was Simon), the first Apostle chosen

    by Jesus [Matt. 10:2] , through St. Francis of Assisi? Of course not. Where I was raised, that's calledgrabbing at straws.

    http://www.jonchristianryter.com/2005/040805.html

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    3/18

     At the same time, Gloria Olivae symbolized the Benedictine Order according to St. Benedict, amonk from Nursia and the son of a Roman noble. Benedict was canonized as a saint in 1220 AD. Hedied in 543 AD. In Malachy's prophesy about the 112th pope, he said the last Pope would be anOlivetan priest (a wise and powerful pontiff, accessible to God's Divine word who points out, withgentleness, the errors being taught to the laity by other priests). This was Benedict XVI, but it isnot Pope Francis I.

    The 112th Pope is described as Gloria Olivae (the glory of the olives). According to thecombined Malachy and St. Benedictprophesies, this is Pope Francis—the last pope, and/or perhaps, antipope, in the world. There are a couple of logical scenarios here. First, olives and olivebranches denote peace. With the continuous strife in the Middle East—wars and rumors of war—andwith Bible prophesy telling us that when Antichrist appears in the world he—Antichrist—will arrangea peace so deceitfully alluring that the world will adore him. Second, no Catholic pontiff will be

    theAntichrist. As you study Scripture, you will find that every reference to Antichrist refers to him aseither an Assyrian or a Syrian. Antichrist will be a Muslim, not a Pope in the Catholic Church. Nor isRome the "harlot of Babylon." That is a title reserved for Jerusalem. Third, St. Benedict prophesiedthat the last pope would be a Benedictine. But, it appears that's possible only if God planned thisconfusion, with two last popes—Gloria Olivae and Petrus Romanus both being Olivetan priestsaccording to the 865-year old prophecy. Up to PopeJohn Paul II  the Malachy Prophesy was totallyaccurate. What are the odds, at this late date, that the balance of it proves to be wrong?

    Some loyal but doubting Catholics believe the door is open for even more pontiffs between GloriaOlivae and Petrus Romanus to sit on the Roman throne. Not likely. What is most confusing is thatparts of the two prophesies of Popes 111 and 112—Gloria Olivae andPetrus Romanus—partially fitboth Benedict XVI and Francis I. But Jesuit theologians believe both prophesies more appropriatelyfitFrancis I.than Benedict XVI. Francis I, while a strong political leader, has not been thecompassionate spiritual leader of the Catholic Church which the faithful found in Pope John PaulII and, somewhat, in Benedict XVI.

     As theological and political strife caused by the rise of Muslim extremism in the Mideast aimed directly

    http://www.jonchristianryter.com/2008/081007.htmlhttp://www.jonchristianryter.com/2005/041905.htmlhttp://www.jonchristianryter.com/2005/041905.htmlhttp://www.jonchristianryter.com/2005/041905.html

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    4/18

    at the destruction of Christianity and Judaism mushroomed in the first decade of the 21stcentury, Pope John Paul II and then Pope Benedict XVI found themselves quietly fighting pontificalpolitical turf wars in the corridors of the Vatican for which they had no stomach and no experience—

     just like Barack Obama, the community organizer who is losing the political and economic turf warswith China, the re-emerging Soviet Union, the birthing of ISIS and the rebirth of the Caliphate—whichintends to lead the global Islamic State in the 21st century.

    Pope John Paul II, who suffered from Parkinson's Disease, wrote a letter of resignation twice. Oncein 1989 and again in 2004, so that in the event he became mentally or physically incapacitated andcould not function as the pontiff, the cardinals could replace him. In both instances his aides talkedhim out of submitting his resignation to the Vatican's Secretariat of State.

    In 2004, Angelo Cardinal Sodano served as both the Dean of the College of Cardinals and the

    Secretariat of State. Next to the Pope, he was the most powerful bureaucrat in the Holy See and,according to many of the lower echelon bureaucrats in the Vatican, he was responsible for the power vacuum and back-stabbing that broughtJoseph Cardinal Ratsinger  to the apex of Catholicism.

    Pope Benedict XVI, who has long been recognized as an intellectual theologian, had no stomach for political infighting, and usually didn't even know what was going on in the Vatican bureaucracy untilembarrassing information leaked into the public domain. WhileBenedict was backed by the Italianpoliticians in the Roman Curia in order to keep any Cardinals from outside of Europe from becoming

    Pope, the Curia made little effort to keep the Bavarian pontiff appraised of what the "little borgias" (themiddle-ranked members of the Roman Curia) were doing.

    Benedict, like John Paul II and, today Pope Francis I, found himself in a geographic turf war. Non-Italians have unabatedly controlled the Holy See since Oct. 16, 1978. Before the death of John PaulII, the Italian politicians in the Vatican and in the Roman Curia sought out the young and politicallyambitious members of theCuria staff and told them "Hear everything. See everything. Report what you hear and see. Say nothing to anyone else." 

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    5/18

    In 2011, Benedict XVI's butler, Paolo Gabriele, began photocopying scores of confidentialdocuments and letters in the possession of the Pope, referred to in the media as the  Vatileak Papers,dealing with widespread corruption inside the Vatican, including a homosexual lobby which includedhomosexual cardinals, bishops, priests and monks and a cabal of powerful of global homosexualpower brokers living in a virtual netherworld in Rome. Gabriele surrendered the photocopies to Italy'slargest daily newspaper, La Repubblica, which printed the story. Gabriele confessed to Benedict XVI,telling the pontiff he did what he did not for money but because he loved the pope "...like a son loveshis father.." who summarily fired him and brought him up on charges of aggravated theft. He spentthree months in prison before Benedict pardoned him. At that point,Benedict commissioned threecardinals to launch a covert investigation on the sins within the Vatican—for Benedict's eyes only.They produced a 300-page report which was supposed be under lock and key. It was also leakedto La Repubblica.

    In addition, the documents and letters Gabriele stole from Benedict XVI's were used by two journalists who wrote books about theVatileak Papers. First (preceding the Cardinal Papers)was Gianluigi Nuzzi's book, "Our Holiness: The Secret Papers of Benedict XVI," was basedon Gabriele's stolen documents. The release of the book sent the Vatican into a tailspin andtriggered Benedict's secret investigation not only of homosexuality in the Holy See (the ecclesiastical

     jurisdiction of the Catholic Church in Rome), but an investigation of bank fraud.or, at least, transactionnot known or approved by the Pope, that transmitted large sums of cash, sent to unrecordedrecipients in politically unstable countries. The transfers were authorized by Ettore Gotti

    Tedeschi who was, at that time, the President of the Institute for Works of Religion, also known as theVatican Bank. The investigation into Tedeschi, an economist and banker, revealed that he was alsomember of a secular Catholic secret order known as Opus Dei, founded in 1928 and sanctionedbyPope Pius XII in 1950. Opus Dei is arguably the most controversial force in the Catholic Churchbecause its membership is comprised of secular priests and laity. Criticism of  Opus Dei centerslargely on their rules, which include all forms of elitism and misogyny: the physiological, political andeconomic discrimination of women which includes hatred or merely simple contempt of women, as

    well as the sexual discrimination of, or violence against, women. In any event, in 1982 Pope JohnPaul II decreed Opus Dei to be a personal prelate—an entity under the sole jurisdiction of its own

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    6/18

    bishops wherever they were, instead of being part of any geographical dioceses.

    On Mon., Feb. 11, 2013, conservative pontiff Pope Benedict XVIannounced that he would officiallyresign the papacy on Thurs., Feb. 28, citing "...lack of strength of mind and body due to advanced age." as his reason. Few people believed him, and investigative reporters and conspiracy buffsscrambled for the "real" reason.

    Dr. Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican magazine, who is anything but a conspiracy nut,has more knowledge of what's going on in the Holy See  than mostpriests. When Moynihan commented on his skepticism that Benedict XVI resigned because of oldage, in part because he had seen him twice that week, "...once at a concert on Monday evening where I was sitting abut 20 yards from him, and at his General Audience on Wednesday. For a man of 85, he looked well, though he did seem tired."  Moynihan said that, on the 9th,Benedict met with

    the Knights of Malta, chiding "...that's what was weighing so heavily on Pope Benedict —spending several hours that morning with the Knights of Malta (a western civilization military order in medieval times). The meeting exhausted him, so he resigned."  Moynihan unequivocally associated PopeBenedict's resignation with that meeting.

    What, he wondered, did the Knights of Malta tell the Pope that caused Benedict XVI  to take theunprecedented step of resigning? Was it a simple, "You're fired!"  Seymour Hersh, a syndicatedcolumnist who began his career with the New York Times and now writes primarily for the New 

    Yorker , sees a nefarious scheme being played out with the Knights of Malta squarely in the center of it. TheKnights of Malta, Hersh fans theorize, are among the most feared secret societies in theworld. They were, according to legend, the most feared papal army during theCrusades. Hersh begins to lose credibility when he said the Knights of Malta, today, are the keyingredient to an effort by a handful of neo-cons who plan to overthrow the United States. (In privatecompany Hersh  is more likely to be more free with his view that the Knights of Malta  planned 9-11for the sole purpose of weakening the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.) Interestingly, when PopeFrancis fired Cardinal Burke as Chief Justice of the Vatican's Supreme Court, hetransferred Burke to the slap-in-the-face, largely ceremonial, post of Patron of the Sovereign Military

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    7/18

    Order of Malta.

    Moynihan opted for a slightly different version, still centered on BenedictXVIbeing fired by the Knights of Malta "...in order to pave the way for anew pope who will sanction homosexual marriage, non-celibate priestsand other projects such as...[de-sacramentalizing] the Church."   Hisresignation, with a standard "two weeks notice," suggests PopeBenedict may have been given the choice of resigning or beingterminated (and not in the unemployed sense of the word).

    Questions like these are always asked when someone "important" dies.Everything else aside, it doesn't really matter how we got here becausethis is where we are. Efforts were made, twice, to entice or force John

    Paul II to resign. The Code of Canon Law in 1917 provided for theresignation of popes suffering from chronic conditions at age 75 or older.In 1975 Paul VI revisited the 1917 decree, adding: "Paternity cannot beresigned," suggesting, perhaps, that he was pressured by someone withthe power to intimidate a pontiff, that old popes should retire in order tomake room for new ideas. When John Paul II was nudged twice to do

    so, the pontiff said: " Jesus Christ didn't climb down off the cross before His job was done. I can dono less." 

    Did someone cash in John Paul's second conditional retirement consideration when Parkinson'sDisease was ravaging his body just before he died of septic shock in 2005? (Medically, a largepercentage of elderly Parkinson's patients get sepsis when their organs begin to shut down.

     Approximately 80% or more will die from septic shock within 48 hours.) When the College of Cardinals began to consider Benedict XVI's successor, their number one 5/2 choice wasCanadian Marc Cardinal Ouelett the former Archbishop of Quebec. The oddsmakers said the onlyreason he wouldn't replaceBenedict XVI would be his declining the post.

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    8/18

    He didn't decline it, nor did he win it.

    The bookies' favorite was Angelo Cardinal Scola at 8/8, while the media pundits rated him fifth at7/1. Third was Peter Kodwo Appiah Cardinal Turkson of Ghana, and President of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Cardinal Turkson  is one of the most popular cardinals in the worldand was a 4/1 certainty for the job. The fourth ranked choice at 5/1 was Leonardo Cardinal

    Sandri. Fifth was an Italian, Gianfranco Cardinal Ravasi, the President of the Pontifical Council for Culture. He was ranked 6/1 only because he was an Italian. Sixth in popularity was Tarsico CardinalBertone, Benedict XVI's Secretary of State, who weighed in at 12/1. He was one of the master politicians in the Vatican. Cardinal Bertone should have been the odds-on favorite for the job sincehe was responsible for the election of a large bloc of Italian cardinals. His problem is he is not muchliked because he knows where all the proverbial bodies are buried. Which should have assured hiselection. Instead, the job went to the 16/1 to 1 longshot, Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio who,

    reportedly, ran neck-to-neck against Josef Cardinal Ratsinger in 2005.

    The oddsmakers said when the Argentine lost against the Bavarian in 2005, he lost his last chance tograb the Fisherman's ring.Cardinal Bergoglio was viewed as "papible"—always a cardinal and never a pope.Four others were in the mix although they were longshots at best. Both represented better days of the Catholic Church. First was Angelo Cardinal Bagnasco, a very conservative archbishopwould have returned the Holy See to the days of Pius XII. Next was Christoph CardinalSchönbon from Austria, a John Paul II protége. His problem? He personally intervened in his

    diocese to re-install an openly homosexual man to a parrish council, humiliating the priest whodischarged him. Also in the first round was Odile Scherer , another South American, from Braziland Luis Cardinal Tagle  from the Philippines.

    Cardinal Schönbon had a strong following. His supporters wanted two things: first, no Italian pontiff and second, a pope from Europe. Which is why when socialist Cardinal Bergoglio arrived in Romeon September 17, 2013, much of the media wrote him off as a"papile.". This was his second trip to theSynod Hall of the General Congregation in a decade. The oddsmakers were certain thatBergoglio,who placed a weak second in 2005, was a dark horse in 2013 because runners-ups in prior conclaves

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    9/18

    seldom show in the next race. But Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio thought differently. He arrivedwith great expectations. Barely a few paid any attention to him, not even the media who chose insteadto chase the more well-known cardinals like Timothy Cardinal Dolan, the Archbishop of New York.But Benedict XVI had his own successor in mind—Marc Cardinal Ouelett,whom Benedict transferred to the Vatican to run the Congregation for Bishops, the Curia office thatvets all bishop appointments world-wide, to make Ouelett powerful enough to command the 77 voteshe would need to become the pontiff. The problem was that, even in Benedict's own camp there wasdivision. In addition to Benedict's own pick, Ouelett, there was another popular German in themix: Cardinal Schönbon. In the running initially was Cardinal Dolan and Sean Cardinal O'Malley,the Archbishop of Boston. When the list of candidates was whittled down from 12 to7, O'Malley and Dolan became "voters" instead of potential pontiffs. Americans were not wanted inthe Papal Palace except as temporary visitors.

    Yet small clusters of cardinals—both socialist and ultra-conservative from various second worldcountries—wanted a pope who was not a Vatican insider, nor part of the problems in the Curia or theVatican Bank. They voted for Cardinal Bergoglio in 2005 when he almost won the Fisherman's ring.While the mainstream Italian and European cardinals dismissed Bergoglio as an "almost ran," theproblem was that too many of the candidates were protéges of Pope Benedict, which split the vote.and made it impossible for the popular Cardinals like Ouelett, Sadano and Scola  to get the 77 votesthey needed. When the clock ticked down, the longshot political socialist, Jorge Benrgoglio wouldbecome Pope Francis I.

    During the Conference of the Diocese of Rome at the Basilica of St. John Lateran on June 6, 2005,some 60 days after his papal inauguration, Pope Benedict XVI made a statement which wouldbecome a prophetic utterance of his successor a decade later. Continuing with the topic,the dictatorship of relativism, from the pre-conclave mass he had held earlier thatday, Benedict said: "Today a particularly insidious obstacle to the task of education is the massive

     presence in our society and culture of a relativism which, recognizing nothing as definitive, leaves asthe ultimate criterion only man's self with his desires. And, under the the semblance of freedom it becomes a prison for everyone, because it separates all people from one another, locking each

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    10/18

     person within his or her own ego." Benedict referred to this lust of self as the self-limitation of reasonwhich was a dictatorship of relativism.

     At the root of this problem, Benedict XVI said, was Immanuel Kent's "self-limitation of reason."(Kent was an 18th century German philosopher, and the father of modern philosophy.) Thedictatorship of relativism, Benedict continued, was a contradiction to modern science whose

    excellence is based on the power of reason to grasp and understand the truth of whatever topicundertaken.

    Essentially, Pope Benedict XVI was an intellectual theologian—a teaching pope. What he was notwas a politician except in a papal sense in the world's smallest political state—the Vatican. Francisthe Jesuit, is the opposite. He is a global socialist politician who is attempting to interfere with thingswhich have nothing to do with man's salvation through the laws or grace of God.

    Francis I  is treading on turf that is not within a Catholic pontiff's theological domain. He's treading onturf that only an anti-pope would dare tread. Those within the Vatican bureaucracy or the Curia arewatching a quiet revolution take place under Francis I. Control over the powerful Vatican City-State isslowly slipping from the steel grip of the centuries-old Italian hierarchy and into the hands of one man—the Church's first Latin American pontiff—and the world's first communist pope—who has noqualms about firing the old guard and replacing the Italian bureaucracy with new faces from diversecountries, many of whom are not cardinals, bishops, or priests—but are members of the laity. Many

    are women (who are, also, not nuns).

    The fact that Francis I is a Jesuit communist appears to have been either not known, or simplyignored by the media in the United States; and was referred to in Europe only as Europeandemocratic socialism. However, in largely socialist South America, politicians like Bolivianpresident Evo Morales know a communist when he meets one. Which is why,when Cardinal Bergoglio won the Fisherman's ring, Morales presented Francis I with a communistcrucifix fashioned from a hammer and sickle by Jesuit priest Luis Espinal.Espinal became a Spanish

    missionary in Bolivia during the paramilitary dictatorship of Luis Garcia Mesa. Espinal was murdered

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    11/18

    by a government death squad on March 21, 1980.

    When Morales presented the hammer and sickle crucifix to Francis I,  itcaused mixed emotions from La Pas to Rome. Vatican reporters saidthe "...Pope was taken aback by the gift, but thought it best not to make a fussabout it."  While one Vatican -based bishop suggested that Morales was

    attempting to manipulate God with a purely communist artifact,Boliva's Communications Minister  brushed the complaints aside, innocentlyclaiming that the "....sickle evokes the peasant, the hammer of the carpenter represents the humble workers—God's people,"  adding. "...there was no other reason for the gift."  Some media reports claimed Francis I was embarrassedby the gift and told Morales  that "...this isn't good."   The Vaticanspokesman, Federico Lombardi told the Vatican media that it was more likely the Pope expressed

    consternation at the gift, saying he didn't "...think [he] would put this symbol on an altar in any church." One of the strongest reactions came from Spanish Bishop Jose Ignacio Munilla whosaid "The height of arrogance is to manipulate God for the service of atheist ideologies." 

     As Catholic theological historians examine Pope Francis' political, societal and theological agenda itwill become apparent that Pope Francis' word carries about as much credibility as Barack Obama's—which, to the rest of the world, is none at all. In fact, the only things which Muslim Obama  andJesuit Francis agree on are pretty much the same: that man, not the sun, is responsible for climate

    change. That the working middle class should share their wealth with the impoverished less fortunate. And, that the less fortunate have the right to invade the lands of the more prosperous, whose hardwork and sweat equity provided their bounty; and that the impoverished have-nots have an inherentright to steal what they need to survive and prosper from the haves.

    Worse yet, the Vatican Synod signaled a more welcome tone to gay and lesbian Catholics. After attending a May, 2015 same-sex marriage referendum in Ireland, Cardinal Burke, speaking in aninterview, said that he struggled to understand how any nation could redefine the nature of marriage. "I mean,"  he said, "this is in defiance of God. It's just incredible. Pagans may have tolerated 

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    12/18

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    13/18

    York in September and also for the UN COP21 Climate Change Conference in Paris in December. Anencyclical is an nonbinding discussion on ecology and the environment which is sent to all bishopsthrough the lens of "official" Catholic view. In the case of the Pope's April 15 "draft encyclical" thatprovides the church leadership with what can be construed as a "sneak preview" of the environmentalencyclical.

    While the encyclical won't demonize energy use (which the left wanted), Francis I said thatenvironmental doomsday warnings can no longer be be met with disdain. Francis I stressed, as truth,the leftwing consensus that global warming is real and that it's caused by man and, for that reason, itcannot be greeted with disdain. Francis Iplaced the blame for global warming on big business,shortsighted energy companies, even shorter-sighted politicians, scurrilous scientists, laissez faireeconomists and a myopic public who believes anyone wearing a symbol or badge of authority up toand including a Eagle Scout merit badge. Since Francis I was blaming every person in the world for 

    global warming, he wanted to make sure that everyone everywhere knew they shared the blame. Theonly entityFrancis did not blame was God who created the universe, the Milky Way galaxy, our solor system, Earth and our sun—the heating and air conditioning system—which heats and cools it. In hisencyclical,Pope Francis I said, "The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like animmense pile of filth. In many parts of the planet, the elderly lament that once beautiful landscape isnow covered with rubbish." While Francis sent his encyclical to every Catholics in the world throughtheir cardinals, bishops and priests, he really directed his message not only to the billion Catholics inthe world, but to"...every person living on the planet," adding that he "...would like to enter a dialogue

    with all people on Earth about our common home." 

    Unlike every pontiff who has preceded him, Francis I is opting to use lay people in jobs previouslyheld only by priests, bishops, cardinals and an occasional deacon. It seems Francis I has deliberatelyput himself on a collision course with the Curia as he pulled the fangs of his adversaries in the Vaticanbureaucracy. Why? Perhaps to more easily identify his political enemies and get rid of them beforethey could build a support base in the Curia strong enough to control the new pope. Francis I justifiedhis war against his former peers by describing the Curia as narcissistic and it's ranking membersas"...little Borgias who are the leprosy of the papacy." Francis I quickly established himself as

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    14/18

    someone not afraid to challenge the orthodoxies of the Church and push hard against a Vaticanhierarchy which is adamantly resistant to change. But what appears to be happening in Rome today isthat with the new appointments of non-Italians, and in many cases, non-Europeans in the inner-workings of the Vatican bureaucracy, the centuries old grip the Italian hierarchy has had over theChurch is slipping. The Vatican turf war that plagued John Paul II and Benedict XVI alsoplagued Francis I. Only, much of what is now happening in the Curia is of Francis I'smaking. Francis has no problem waging war against the Italian appartchiks since Francis has noqualms dumping the old guard. Almost from the day he inherited the Fisherman's ring in 2013, newfaces began to arrive in the Curia. And, some of those who vanished were among the most powerfulBishops and Cardinals in the world.

    In 2003 Pope John Paul II named Bishop Raymond Leo Burke the Archbishop of St.Louis. Burke's star was on the rise. In 2004Archbishop Burke denied Democratic Presidential

    nominee Sen. John Kerry [D-MA] communion because of his pro-abortion stance. In2007 Archbishop Burke resigned from the board of a Catholic Hospital because the hospital allowedpro-abortion singer Sheryl Crow do a benefit concert to raise funds for the hospital.

     And, in 2009 Burke condemned Notre Dame for giving Barack Obama a honorary degree, calling itthe biggest scandal in the history of the University of Notre Dame because Obamaaggressivelypromoted an anti-life and anti-family agenda. In 2008Pope Benedict made Archbishop Burke  thehead of the Vatican Supreme Court, and shortly after being promoted, Burke was recorded on tape

    saying that Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the head of the Washington, DC archdiocese and other liberalpriests and bishops in the church weakened the faith by refusing to ban pro-abortion politicians andcelebrities from receiving the church's sacraments. Burke was required to apologize for hisstatement.

    But that didn't stop Pope Benedict from appointing Archbishop Burke to three additional Vaticanposts. Burke was named a member of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts (which interpretscanon law), a member of the Congregation for the Clergy which regulates the formation and trainingof diocesan priests and deacons, the Congregation of Bishops (the curial body that oversees the

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    15/18

    appointments of most Latin Church bishops) and, finally, in 2010, Pope BenedictXVI elevated Burke  to the College of Cardinals.

    On Dec. 17, 2013 Burke's star fell. Pope Francis I fired Burke as the head of the Vatican SupremeCourt and replaced him withCardinal Wuerl in a move that conservative Catholics warned wouldultimately have devastating consequences for Catholics as the communist socialism of Francis

    I permeated the Curia and, ultimately, poisoned Catholicism..From time to time various Popes,conveniently ignoring the Constitution of the United States which requires the US government toprotect its border from illegals because, to date, no pope has ever been an American so it doesn'tmatter to them if illegals pour through our porous borders and rob, rape and commit mayhem. Variouspopes have attempted to use what they mistakenly believe is God-anointed universal papal power they somehow believe they possess, and that it should work in largely Protestant America to convinceUS Presidents that God will bless and prosper them if they grant amnesty to every illegal who sneaks

    into the country.

    While Cardinal Burke was the most outspoken advocate of traditional Christianity during the pontificalreign of both John Paul II and Benedict XVI, and fought abortion, homosexuality and same sexmarriage, Francis attacked the hornet's next of pedophilia, creating an international committee toweed out pedophiles within the church. Eight of these new international committees (only one dealingwith pedophilia) are located outside of Italy. Journalist Ernesto Galli Della Loggia, in a piecepublished in Italy's leading daily, Corriere della Sera, observed that "...by entrusting delicate

    government tasks to hierarchies that are made up of mainly no-Italians who are not residents inRome, the pope is putting himself on a collision course with the Curia's traditional power. What seemsto be emerging is a plan to concentrate power not in Rome, but in [Pope Francis ]." 

    Francis I, of course immediately began talking with Barack Obamaabout the need for the UnitedStates to open the portals wide and let those who wanted to come to America enter—whether in thebright of day or the dark of night. And, of course, since erasing the US border was one of the topitems on Obama's election bucket list (even though he won the Election in 2008 with a total of 

    35,626,580 non-existent votes), One hundred thirty-two million, six hundred eighteen thousand, five

    http://www.jonchristianryter.com/Two_Cents/2cworth.091128.html

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    16/18

    hundred eighty votes were counted in the Election of 2008. The problem is that only 96,992,000eligible registered voters, who signed in at voting centers across the United States actually castballots. The extra votes were provided by two sources: ACORN's and SEIU's "get-out-and-vote"activity. None of those "votes" came from registered voters. They came from people who [a] were noteligible to vote, and [b] whose absentee ballots were placed in valid absentee ballot boxes while their voter registration applications were rejected and destroyed (while their fake votes were counted asvalid).

    On July 15, 2015 while addressing a Vatican conference in Mexico City via social media instead of inperson, Pope Francis I chose to mimic Obama's socialist views and blame the American peoplebecause illegals who criminally steal into this country from "...around the world are subjected to racist and xenophobic attitudes..."  and that decency calls for the tens of thousands of Central American"children" who illegally cross the border into the United States to be"welcomed and protected." 

    NBC (which is about as atheistic as an American media organization is surpassed only by ABC andMSNBC), championed Francis I's argument that illegal immigration (international law-breaking) hasbecome a hallmark of modern society. Most people who are forced to emigrate suffer and, in manyinstances, suffer tragic deaths. NBC echoed Francis' words that the rights of those emigrants areviolated when they are denied safe haven in whatever country they wish to live. What rights?

    The papal argument appears to be that people have an inherent right to live. wherever they want. If 

    so, then the Pope should open the borders of the Vatican State and invite the poor and downtroddenfrom Central America he cares so much for, or better yet, from the Muslim nations of the world whichISIS is now converting to Islam by the sword, to come and enjoy safe haven in the Vatican.

    To visit the Vatican you must have a passport. Not an Italian passport (which you will need to enter Italy or better yet, Rome, where the Vatican State is located), but a Vatican State passport whenallows you to enter the Vatican State. While an Italian passport will admit you to Rome, it will notadmit you to the world's smallest State—less than a half kilometer (.44 km). That country, the Vatican,

    is policed by the Swiss Army. No citizens on Earth is allowed to enter the Vatican illegally.

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    17/18

    For that matter, no American citizen can enter Mexico without a valid passport—even accidentally. Doyou remember the plight of Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, who made a wrong turn a border checkpoint and ended up in a Tijuana, Mexico prison for 214 days? No citizen from any country or principality in the world can go to the Vatican and rob, rape, maim or murder, which makes the pope'splace the safest turf on Earth. I can see why Francis I wants all of the murders and rapists fromCentral and South America to go to the United States—it will keep them out of Europe and,particularly, Italy. Not that the Costra Nostra doesn't support the Catholic Church with money fromdrugs, gambling and prostitution. The Mafia dons are among some of the biggest donors to theCatholic Church, fallaciously believing that tithing to the Catholic priest who will ultimately bury themwill buy their souls from Hell with power theoretically bequeathed to Peter  by Christ whenthe Savior of mankind said in Matthew 16:19, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven; and whatever you bind on Earth shall [have been] bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on Earthshall [have been] loosed in Heaven." 

    One of the biggest fallacies of the Roman Catholic Church is that the Roman Emperor Constantine (the first pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church who assumed what Catholics thoughtwas Simon Peter 's mantle as the pontiff of the Catholic Church) in 306 AD when, in fact, Jesus wassimply empowering all men, through the Holy Spirit, to forgive their fellow man—not of overt sins likerobbery, rape, murder and mayhem, or of cursing God Almighty, His son Christ Jesus, or blaspheming the Holy Spirit—for which there is no forgiveness—but forgiving aught (personalmisgivings) against one's fellow beings.Man lacks the power to erase sin from the memory of 

    God. It's important for Christians to understand why that conversation took place. It was notbecause Jesus was establishing a political church hierarchy on Earth. Christ raised the question onlyto determine if His own disciples knew who He was, "Who do men say that I, the Son of Man,am?" The disciples replied, "Some say that You areJohn the Baptist , some Elijah (who, like Enoch,to this date has never died but will return to Earth during the Tribulation and preach the Gospel theJews in Israel) and others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets" Christ quickly asked:, "But who say yewho I am?"

    It was Simon Peter 's answer which initiated the response below when he said: "Thou art the Christ,

  • 8/19/2019 Jon Christian Ryter's History of Jesuit Takeover

    18/18

    the Son of the Living God," whichgarnered this response from Christ that assumes Divine authorityfor the Pope, from Constantine  to Francis I which none have ever possessed: "Blessed arethou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, but My Father, who is in Heaven.. And, I say also this: You are Peter..."  ( petra, the stone). "...And upon this rock..." (petros or kephas[Aramaic] for rock or cliff ledge) "...I will build My church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it. And I will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; and whatsoever you bind on Earth will bebound in Heaven; and whatsoever you loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven."  The rock uponwhich the congregation of Christian faith was built was not Simon Peter  ( petra)but the Divine truthwhich Simon Peter  spoke ( petros); thus the rock upon which the Church was built was Jesus Christ.

    Simon Peter  never assumed for himself any superior leadership role over the Apostles because noneexisted. There was no papal ascendancy as "keeper of the keys" from Peter   to anyone. From theconversion of James (the half brother of  Jesus) who perpetually doubted the claims of  Christ's

    disciples until he saw the resurrected Messiah, James became the leader of the Christian church inthe Upper Room on the Day of Pentecost. At no time did Peter  ever claim to be more than an Apostle [1 Pe.1:1 and 2:1], or anything more than an elder in the Church [1 Pe. 5:1] .

    Evidence of the headship of James and not Peter  as the leader of the Christian movement is foundin Acts 14:26-15:20  when Paulreturned from Attalia and engaged in a dispute with some of theapostles over accepting Gentiles into the fellowship without first converting toJudaism. James arbitrarily settled the argument, ruling that Gentiles could become Christians without

    first being circumcised. A second incident was the same dispute between Peter and Paul  [in Gal.2:11-16 ] where, once again, Paul reminded Peter that since circumcision is a physical act, it is"works." And since we are saved by grace through Christ and not by works, neither Jews nor Gentiles are saved by works. Had Peter  had been the head of the Church, that argument would never have taken place.


Recommended