Yes, really superb. I very much appreciate, too, the careful attention to emend and refine the information. No doubt, this is a work of dedication to serve the truth.
Very good analysis. Reading Leo’s XIII encyclicals on liberalism I always had the impression that the beginnings are good and in the second parts he apologise for condemning liberalism , it was unnerving and confusing .
The break in lineage can be attributed to the Veto of Rampolla from the Papacy when the Archduke of Austria declared him a mason. Then allowing for the election of St. Pius the X.
History usually records that it was the Emperor Franz Joseph himself who instructed his representative at the Conclave, the Prince Bishop of Krakow, to exercise the Imperial Veto if it seemed that the Cardinals were likely to elect Cardinal Rampolla. It seems that Cardinal Rampolla had offended the Emperor in some way - I do not think that Cardinal Rampolla was ever “declared a Mason” as you suggest.
@@Mark3ABE well could be so, in an official level as no one would declare a card carrying mason at that level, but it does seem to point that the Archduke knew and suspected he was. 'On the first ballots, Cardinal Rampolla, who had been secretary of state under Leo XIII, received the most votes, but even in the beginning Carta Sarto received the third most votes. And with each ballot his votes increased. The Austrian-Hungarian monarchy delivered a veto against Cardinal Rampolla in the fourth session, but it's probable that this had no effect, as the Cardinals considered it an outrage and mostly ignored it. As his votes mounted, Cardinal Sarto began to beg the Cardinals not to vote for him. "I am absolutely unworthy and incapable of the Papacy.... For the love of God, forget me!" He then proceeded to enumerate his many faults and weaknesses to try and persuade the Cardinals against him. But it was to no avail. The result of the seven ballots was as follows: 1st Ballot Rampolla 24 Gotti 17 Sarto 5 Other 16 2nd Ballot Rampolla 29 Gotti 16 Sarto 10 Other 7 3rd Ballot Rampolla 29 Gotti 9 Sarto 21 Other 3 4th Ballot Rampolla 30 Gotti 3 Sarto 24 Other 5 5th Ballot Rampolla 24 Gotti 6 Sarto 27 Other 5 6th Ballot Rampolla 16 Gotti 7 Sarto 35 Other 4 7th Ballot Rampolla 10 Gotti 2 Sarto 50 - " sspx.org/en/news/feast-pope-st-pius-x-6-giuseppe-melchior-sarto-future-pope-24755 My point is that, the lineage of break that Mr. Theo seemed to point to, is that they did not see Rampolla not win the Papacy, when Sarto did. Which thus uncovered much of the Masonic plot by his work in Pacendi, but seems like even St. Pius the X said that his work did not slow down the work of the sect. catholicism.org/papacy-freemasonry.html For what it looks like here, St. Pius the X was shown proof of Rampolla's membership to the Lodges Mr. Theo presented. I have read the Speech by Monsignuer Jouin as well.
Interesting. Traditional circles need to take a closer at Church history throughout the nineteenth century. Is there a way you could share your sources?
The Galileo affair was a key pivot point. The Church lost her confidence in standing up to alleged scientific discovery (and by extention, attidues of the world more broadly). By the time of Pius XII the Church was softening on evolution, and after his passing it was all over and the flood gates were open.
Are you saying the church making peace with modern science is softening? I think that this is just inevitable. Catholic belief is never pure fideism but based on reason too!
@karlheven8328 It is indeed softening. Natural science is all good and well in so far as it does not contradict the Church and her historic teaching. 'Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so' - St Augstine
@@Tommyl107 St Joseph Calasanz accepted hylocentrism at the time and he’s canonised. And we’d have looked absurd if we’d tried to deny demonstrable physical facts about reality - just as the young earth creationists who claim fossils and radiocarbon dating results are deliberate stumbling blocks sent by God to test our faith look absurd now
@minui8758 We wouldn't put the beliefs of one lay Saint over that of the Church. Galileo was tried for heresey against well established Church teaching. Copernicanism is the first great lie in the natural science's to shake the foundation of the Church, and set us on the path to the direbiolical nightmare we see today. See 'The principle' and other materials by Robert Sungenis if you feel it necessary to study the topic from a natural perspective. Also see the scientific 'mystery' known as 'the axis of evil' (aptly named by the secular enemies of Christendom). 'Trust the science' minded Catholics are destroying the Church from the inside. The very essence of modernism is reinterpreting Catholism through the lens of natural science. See St Augstine quote in my previous comment and give me your thoughts. Tell me, if you reject Biblical creation on grounds of natural science (as taught by all Church fathers and the Catholic Church up untill the Vatican 2 revolution), do you reject the resurrection on the grounds of natural science?
@Earl-z3t Sad to hear that, "few rays of sunshine in my dark life." Hope you can remember that Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ will put all things right in His time and that we might try in our own particular ways to enjoy the time allotted to us. 🤛
The Vatican obelisk from Heliopolis (the Egyptians' most highly regarded repository of the hermetic knowledge of the mystery cults, forerunners to modern day esoteric seccret soccieties ) indicates who has been in control of the church hierarchies since at least Renaissance times . An occult fertility symbol associated with the myth of Osiris/Nimrod that stands in direct defiance to God's will : Jeremiah 43:13 "He shall break the obelisks of Heliopolis, which is in the land of Egypt; and the temples of the gods of Egypt he shall burn with fire."
Curious to know , Not that this is directly related to this but is there a difference between the French Jacobins and Jacobites of Wales. I read Jacobites of Wales were for the Catholic order and Jacobins were for Freemasonry in some ways?
They are opposites. The French revolutionary Jacobins are named after the former Dominican monastery where they used to meet (Couvent des Jacobins), the Jacobites are followers of James II, the last Catholic King of England
Great topic. Leo XIII social policies have been of intetest to me since my leanings to Chester/Bloc prinipals in the 1990s. Was not Leo XIII the last Thomist Pope? Furthermore, we must admit that enlightened Kings (Bourbons) ushered in themselves Classical Liberal thinking. Indeed....there are times when a Repúblic ( Ecuador 1870) IS superior although maybe temporary or transitional to a Monarchy. I did some research and found this and welcome your comments.... Robert Schuman: Neo Scholastic Humanism and the Reunification of Europe, argues that the absolute monarchies that arose in Europe after 1648 were themselves fatally modern and defective forms of political life. And that ralliement properly understood was an attempt to go back to the ideal of mixed government proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas. This was to be done by accepting the external form of modern republics, but then changing them by means of Catholic principles.
Thanks for listening. I wouldn't say Leo XIII was the last Thomist pope. Rather, he sparked the revival of Thomism which continued until the 60s. I am aware of Schuman and Maritain's theory of Integral Humanism. While they are right that the 'absolute' monarchies were steps towards the modern apostasy, I disagree with their logic on Integral Humanism as the acceptance of the modern republics is a tacit acceptance of their anti-Catholic principles as history has proved.
Sir, may I ask your opinion on Queen Victoria, and her restraining of the liberal values that threatened England and her reign? Did she successfully protect her realm during her reign ?
Queen Victoria was a Constitutional Sovereign and had no political power. She did exercise some political power, surprisingly, mainly on the Continent. For example, her eldest daughter, the Crown Princess of Prussia (later the Empress Frederick of Germany) asked her mother if she would meet the Emperor Franz Joseph and try to persuade him that the time had come for him to step down as President of the German Confederation in favour of the King of Prussia. Franz Joseph did, eventually, agree, although it would not, of course, have been only through Queen Victoria’s representations.
I think Mark3's comment has some truth although I think she did have some political influence, as did Prince Albert. I would say that in the realm of symbols she was generally a force for good in that she became a model of family piety and morality for British society.
@ Thank you - I was not aware of that. Queen Victoria achieved what she did achieve through her personality and her determined character, not through any political power under the Constitution. She did run risks, at times. When Prussia invaded Denmark in 1864, she was firmly on the side of Prussia, however, naturally, the Princess of Wales was on the side of Denmark and there was strong feeling among the people that Britain should be standing up for “little” Denmark against the bully, Prussia. However, Queen Victoria’s own personal politics were to make Prussia our main ally (they had, after all, saved us at Waterloo) and therefore strengthening the position of Prussia was one of her aims. She made no objection when Prussia found an excuse to annex the Kingdom of Hanover.
Democracy, that great sleight of hand. Transition of power to the unGodly under the guise of power to the people. Great Catholic Monarch God Speed take France back to AMDG+ And then Europa entirely+
It is very dodgy to quote Bishop Williamson. The choice of him as a bishop was questioned back in 1988 because of his contrariness and always taking the most extreme position in a process of self validation and validation towards his folliwers. He didn't join the SSPX it joined him and once he got what he wanted he moved out.
I have found it necessary to re listen to every 3-5 minutes
This is superb material
Yes, really superb. I very much appreciate, too, the careful attention to emend and refine the information. No doubt, this is a work of dedication to serve the truth.
I have listened 3 times. I can't wait for the next episode
Appreciation and blessings from Sydney Australia.
Were you in Dr Deep state?
Great video Theo, thanks for Your study .. 💜💜😁
Very good analysis. Reading Leo’s XIII encyclicals on liberalism I always had the impression that the beginnings are good and in the second parts he apologise for condemning liberalism , it was unnerving and confusing .
The break in lineage can be attributed to the Veto of Rampolla from the Papacy when the Archduke of Austria declared him a mason. Then allowing for the election of St. Pius the X.
History usually records that it was the Emperor Franz Joseph himself who instructed his representative at the Conclave, the Prince Bishop of Krakow, to exercise the Imperial Veto if it seemed that the Cardinals were likely to elect Cardinal Rampolla. It seems that Cardinal Rampolla had offended the Emperor in some way - I do not think that Cardinal Rampolla was ever “declared a Mason” as you suggest.
@@Mark3ABE well could be so, in an official level as no one would declare a card carrying mason at that level, but it does seem to point that the Archduke knew and suspected he was.
'On the first ballots, Cardinal Rampolla, who had been secretary of state under Leo XIII, received the most votes, but even in the beginning Carta Sarto received the third most votes. And with each ballot his votes increased.
The Austrian-Hungarian monarchy delivered a veto against Cardinal Rampolla in the fourth session, but it's probable that this had no effect, as the Cardinals considered it an outrage and mostly ignored it.
As his votes mounted, Cardinal Sarto began to beg the Cardinals not to vote for him. "I am absolutely unworthy and incapable of the Papacy.... For the love of God, forget me!" He then proceeded to enumerate his many faults and weaknesses to try and persuade the Cardinals against him. But it was to no avail. The result of the seven ballots was as follows:
1st Ballot Rampolla 24 Gotti 17 Sarto 5 Other 16
2nd Ballot Rampolla 29 Gotti 16 Sarto 10 Other 7
3rd Ballot Rampolla 29 Gotti 9 Sarto 21 Other 3
4th Ballot Rampolla 30 Gotti 3 Sarto 24 Other 5
5th Ballot Rampolla 24 Gotti 6 Sarto 27 Other 5
6th Ballot Rampolla 16 Gotti 7 Sarto 35 Other 4
7th Ballot Rampolla 10 Gotti 2 Sarto 50 -
"
sspx.org/en/news/feast-pope-st-pius-x-6-giuseppe-melchior-sarto-future-pope-24755
My point is that, the lineage of break that Mr. Theo seemed to point to, is that they did not see Rampolla not win the Papacy, when Sarto did. Which thus uncovered much of the Masonic plot by his work in Pacendi, but seems like even St. Pius the X said that his work did not slow down the work of the sect.
catholicism.org/papacy-freemasonry.html
For what it looks like here, St. Pius the X was shown proof of Rampolla's membership to the Lodges Mr. Theo presented. I have read the Speech by Monsignuer Jouin as well.
Interesting. Traditional circles need to take a closer at Church history throughout the nineteenth century. Is there a way you could share your sources?
Can't wait for part 2, have you any detailed episodes on the historical link between communism & freemasonry?
Thank you. I don't have episodes on this topic at the moment. It is certainly something that I would like to explore in the future.
It is said that Rampolla is of the same episcopal lineage of Pope Francis
The Galileo affair was a key pivot point. The Church lost her confidence in standing up to alleged scientific discovery (and by extention, attidues of the world more broadly). By the time of Pius XII the Church was softening on evolution, and after his passing it was all over and the flood gates were open.
Are you saying the church making peace with modern science is softening? I think that this is just inevitable. Catholic belief is never pure fideism but based on reason too!
@karlheven8328 It is indeed softening. Natural science is all good and well in so far as it does not contradict the Church and her historic teaching.
'Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so' - St Augstine
@@Tommyl107 St Joseph Calasanz accepted hylocentrism at the time and he’s canonised. And we’d have looked absurd if we’d tried to deny demonstrable physical facts about reality - just as the young earth creationists who claim fossils and radiocarbon dating results are deliberate stumbling blocks sent by God to test our faith look absurd now
@minui8758 We wouldn't put the beliefs of one lay Saint over that of the Church. Galileo was tried for heresey against well established Church teaching.
Copernicanism is the first great lie in the natural science's to shake the foundation of the Church, and set us on the path to the direbiolical nightmare we see today. See 'The principle' and other materials by Robert Sungenis if you feel it necessary to study the topic from a natural perspective. Also see the scientific 'mystery' known as 'the axis of evil' (aptly named by the secular enemies of Christendom).
'Trust the science' minded Catholics are destroying the Church from the inside. The very essence of modernism is reinterpreting Catholism through the lens of natural science. See St Augstine quote in my previous comment and give me your thoughts.
Tell me, if you reject Biblical creation on grounds of natural science (as taught by all Church fathers and the Catholic Church up untill the Vatican 2 revolution), do you reject the resurrection on the grounds of natural science?
@@minui8758 indeed
Viva la Monarchia.
⚜️ ⚜️ ⚜️
"For the good of the bretheren and the Jewish nation in particular" - Ritual of Freemasonry (1906)
this was interesting
Question: Is The Two Cities Podcast meant to take over for Vendee Radio? Or is it additional to????
I think it was rebranded . The Vendee Radio channel video's are still there.
The channel has been retitled and the scope expanded. All previous broadcasts are available.
@@thetwocitiespodcast Many thanks!
What happened to the Philip II series?
I'm still committed to that. New chapter should be up in the next couple of weeks.
We missed the Lepanto Chapter. The Chapters of Walsh's book are one of the FEW Rays of Light in my dark life.
@Earl-z3t
Sad to hear that, "few rays of sunshine in my dark life."
Hope you can remember that Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ will put all things right in His time and that we might try in our own particular ways to enjoy the time allotted to us. 🤛
What was the "resecum scandal" (if im spelling that correctly) that removed Montini as pro-secretary of state?
Is this available on Apple / Spotify?
The podcast is now available on Apple and Spotify is processing.
@ THANK YOU!!
Those damn Romantics.
Its always the god-damned poets
The Vatican obelisk from Heliopolis (the Egyptians' most highly regarded repository of the hermetic knowledge of the mystery cults, forerunners to modern day esoteric seccret soccieties ) indicates who has been in control of the church hierarchies since at least Renaissance times . An occult fertility symbol associated with the myth of Osiris/Nimrod that stands in direct defiance to God's will : Jeremiah 43:13 "He shall break the obelisks of Heliopolis, which is in the land of Egypt; and the temples of the gods of Egypt he shall burn with fire."
Curious to know , Not that this is directly related to this but is there a difference between the French Jacobins and Jacobites of Wales. I read Jacobites of Wales were for the Catholic order and Jacobins were for Freemasonry in some ways?
I believe under the previous name of Vendee Radio, there is one on the Jacobites. If my memory serves me correctly, Charles Columbe was the guest.
They are opposites. The French revolutionary Jacobins are named after the former Dominican monastery where they used to meet (Couvent des Jacobins), the Jacobites are followers of James II, the last Catholic King of England
Great topic. Leo XIII social policies have been of intetest to me since my leanings to Chester/Bloc prinipals in the 1990s. Was not Leo XIII the last Thomist Pope? Furthermore, we must admit that enlightened Kings (Bourbons) ushered in themselves Classical Liberal thinking. Indeed....there are times when a Repúblic ( Ecuador 1870) IS superior although maybe temporary or transitional to a Monarchy.
I did some research and found this and welcome your comments....
Robert Schuman: Neo Scholastic Humanism and the Reunification of Europe, argues that the absolute monarchies that arose in Europe after 1648 were themselves fatally modern and defective forms of political life. And that ralliement properly understood was an attempt to go back to the ideal of mixed government proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas. This was to be done by accepting the external form of modern republics, but then changing them by means of Catholic principles.
Thanks for listening. I wouldn't say Leo XIII was the last Thomist pope. Rather, he sparked the revival of Thomism which continued until the 60s.
I am aware of Schuman and Maritain's theory of Integral Humanism. While they are right that the 'absolute' monarchies were steps towards the modern apostasy, I disagree with their logic on Integral Humanism as the acceptance of the modern republics is a tacit acceptance of their anti-Catholic principles as history has proved.
What is the source for the quote about the Church becoming indentured to a particular form of government?
Sir, may I ask your opinion on Queen Victoria, and her restraining of the liberal values that threatened England and her reign? Did she successfully protect her realm during her reign ?
Queen Victoria was a Constitutional Sovereign and had no political power. She did exercise some political power, surprisingly, mainly on the Continent. For example, her eldest daughter, the Crown Princess of Prussia (later the Empress Frederick of Germany) asked her mother if she would meet the Emperor Franz Joseph and try to persuade him that the time had come for him to step down as President of the German Confederation in favour of the King of Prussia. Franz Joseph did, eventually, agree, although it would not, of course, have been only through Queen Victoria’s representations.
I think Mark3's comment has some truth although I think she did have some political influence, as did Prince Albert. I would say that in the realm of symbols she was generally a force for good in that she became a model of family piety and morality for British society.
She was fond of Disraeli and sent envoys around Europe representing Jewish interests.
@ Thank you - I was not aware of that. Queen Victoria achieved what she did achieve through her personality and her determined character, not through any political power under the Constitution. She did run risks, at times. When Prussia invaded Denmark in 1864, she was firmly on the side of Prussia, however, naturally, the Princess of Wales was on the side of Denmark and there was strong feeling among the people that Britain should be standing up for “little” Denmark against the bully, Prussia. However, Queen Victoria’s own personal politics were to make Prussia our main ally (they had, after all, saved us at Waterloo) and therefore strengthening the position of Prussia was one of her aims. She made no objection when Prussia found an excuse to annex the Kingdom of Hanover.
People that read and write all their life (LIVE IN THEIR HEAD) that start shit
Is there a connection between freemasonry and Judaism?....
😂.
Lil bit
Democracy, that great sleight of hand. Transition of power to the unGodly under the guise of power to the people. Great Catholic Monarch God Speed take France back to AMDG+ And then Europa entirely+
It is very dodgy to quote Bishop Williamson. The choice of him as a bishop was questioned back in 1988 because of his contrariness and always taking the most extreme position in a process of self validation and validation towards his folliwers. He didn't join the SSPX it joined him and once he got what he wanted he moved out.