ANTI-POPE ANACLETUS & THE ANTI-POPES OF THE APOSTATE "CHURCH" --
THE SIMILARITIES ARE STRIKING PART ONE
February 2, 2014
This text is taken from the book "THE PLOT AGAINST THE CHURCH" written by "Marice Pinay" to warn the upcoming Vatican II council of the overwhelming presence of the Jewish "Fifth Column" in the hierarchy of the Church and their evil plans for the Council. What you are about to read has been for the most part kept from our knowledge in the world of "Tradition." - Why? ANY REFERENCE OF ANTIPOPES (AFTER 1914) AS TRUE POPES COMES FROM THE AUTHOR OF THE BOOK, NOT OURLADYSRESISTANCE.ORG
A JEWISH CARDINAL BECOMES "POPE"
“The chief factor for the outbreak of Jewish heresy in the 12th century was the election of Anacletus II, one of the members of the Jewish Pierleoni family, as Pope in the year 1130.”243 This confession is extraordinarily important, because it comes from a well-known leader of Jewry and in addition corresponds exactly to reality. For such a bold stroke must necessarily not only bring about the fall of Christianity, but also certainly very much encourage the Jews, who now believed that everything was attainable for them. The Rabbi mentioned confirms this view in another passage in his interesting work: “Additional proofs of how the rise of Anacletus had effect on the Jews, one can find in the numerous literature about the mystical, Jewish Pope, who in Hebrew legend is called Andreas or Eichanan. It is to be granted that the rise to power of the member of an ancient Jewish family has stirred the Jewish communities in Italy to activity and has led to a powerful confirmation of their own traditions and opinions.”244
Here the Rabbi mentioned already goes too far and uses one of the chief arguments which the Jews usually advance at their secret meetings in order to prove that their religion and not the Christian is the true one. They assert that the fact that they successfully rose in the hierarchy of the Church up to bishops and cardinals and even reached the throne of St. Peter through all kinds of infamy — even if the Popes in question are really anti-Popes — confirms their opinions and traditions or proves that they can assume that their religion is supported by God.
We will answer this sophistry with an eloquent argument: every human institution which cannot reckon with God’s support would already many centuries ago have been controlled through the devilish “Jewish Fifth Column” in the clergy. The latter believed, eight hundred and thirty two years ago, that they had finally conquered the Holy See and had Holy Church in its power. However, this devilish attempt failed then, just as is the case today, eight hundred years later, and that conquest is simply to be regarded as Utopian striving. If Holy Church could not count upon the support of God, it would already have been subjugated by the hellish mechanism of Jewry, which many with Justice hold to be the powerful tool of the Anti-Christ.
Our Lord Christ called Jewry the “Synagogue of Satan”, and described the Jews as sons of the Devil. Not only on account of their wickedness, but apparently also on account of the extraordinary power which the Devil lends them. Not in vain are the clergy who support the Jews to the harm of the faith described by the already mentioned Holy Council of Toledo as followers of the anti-Christ, and the Jews were called “Ministers of the anti-Christ” by famous Fathers and Saints of the Church.
This many times supernatural seeming capacity to do evil goes back to the dragon, exactly as John has prophesied in his “Apocalypse”. “The Beast and the dragon will be overcome after passing temporary dominance.” So was it resolved by God and Saint John prophesies this in the 13th Chapter of the Apocalypse:
“1. And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten diadems, and upon his heads names of blasphemy. 2. ... And the dragon gave him his own strength, and great power. 3. ... And all the earth was in admiration after the beast. 4. And they adored the dragon, which gave power to the beast: and they adored the beast, saying: Who is like to the beast? and who shall be able to fight with him? 5. And there was given to him a mouth speaking great things, and blasphemies... 7. And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. And power was given him over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation.”245
The power, which the dragon lent to the beast, agrees in astonishing manner with the capacity of the “Synagogue of Satan.” In addition the latter’s power over the Good — as it is written — is transitory. It was also predicted that the Beast, especially in the Communist lands, would utter blasphemies. The interpretation of various Fathers of the Church, theologians and highly-regarded Catholics at different times who equated post-Biblical Jewry with the Beast of the “Apocalypse” seems thus fitting. Reality concords in such astonishing extent with the prophesy, that no doubt seems any more possible.
However, God has also prophesied that the Beast and the dragon, after their temporary victory, will be finally conquered and cast into the fire. This is stated in the 20th Chapter of the Apocalypse:
“9. And there came down fire from God out of heaven, and devoured them; and the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire and brimstone, where both the beast 10. And the false prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”
In the Prophecy yet a second Beast is mentioned, whose characteristics concord in astonishing manner with the “Jewish Fifth Column” in the clergy. It looks outwardly like a lamb, however acts like a dragon. It is its task to support the first Beast, as it is the task of the “Fifth Column” to make easier the triumph of the “Synagogue of Satan”. In the 13th Chapter it is stated:
“11. And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns, like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon. 12. And he executed all the power of the former beast in his sight; and he caused the earth, and them that dwell therein, to adore the first beast, whose wound to death was healed. 14. And he seduced them that dwell on the earth, for the signs, which were given him to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make the image of the beast, which had the wound by the sword, and lived.”.246
It is really astonishing that Jewry, which was fatally wounded through the Inquisition and the activity of the good, has survived and recovered from its wounds. On the other hand, it is the task of the Beast with the exterior of a lamb to attain that men admire the first Beast. This agrees again astonishingly well with the work of the clergy of the “Fifth Column” which is directed so that believers almost worship the Jews. They pretend to be descended from our Lord Jesus. The latter, however, called them Sons of the Devil, and they are the principal enemy of Holy Church.
One must take into consideration that they who follow the Beast are those “whose names are not written in the book of life” (Apocalypse 17:8) and “whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the pool of fire” (Apocalypse 20.15).
After this parenthesis, which was necessary, in order to prevent that the tragedy analysed here led the timid astray, we continue in synthetic form in the relation of the developing tense drama.
One saw completely clearly that Cardinal Pierleoni and his supporters made all preparations in order to obtain the Papal dignity, if the ruling Pope died. The cardinals and better orientated clergy of the Holy Church were directly in an uproar, for they were convinced that Pierleoni secretly adhered to Judaism and that, if he ascended the throne of St. Peter, Holy Church, its centuries old enemy, would be delivered to the Synagogue. The accusations against the cardinals mentioned were among others the following: 1. Under the mask of an apparently zealous, honest Christianity he paid homage in secret to Judaism. He concealed this fact behind pious eloquent sermons — for Pierleoni was one of the best preachers of his time. In addition he cloaked his Jewish belief with good works and his impressive work as director and organiser of Church affairs, as Ambassador of the Pope in France, where he summoned Councils, and also as Cardinal. 2. Besides his private property, he collected other riches, which he had robbed from the Church, in cooperation with other Jews. This money was later used for the purpose of bribing the Cardinals and, through intrigues and influence, of making his adherents bishops and cardinals. He had even bought dearly the votes of several Cardinals for the next Papal election.
In the face of this deadly danger, there formed under the leadership of the chancellor Aimerico and Giovani de Cremas a strong anti-Jewish opposition against Pierleoni, in the Holy Collegium of Cardinals. Cardinal Pierleoni was however clearly superior in this bitter struggle, since he was supported by the nobility, which was strongly permeated with Jews and also by the people whom the Jewish Cardinal had brought onto his side with gold and force. In addition he had been cautious enough to control the army.
Since Pierleoni knew that his opponents among the Cardinals accused him of practising the Jewish religion, he sought to quash these accusations through his pious, blamelessly orthodox sermons, his outstanding activity in the most different domains and even — so it is stated — through the new construction of Churches, to punish lies. As a result he deceived clergy and laity and convinced them that the accusations against him were slanders, and Cardinal Pierleoni was in reality an honest Catholic, who was unjustly attacked by envious opponents of the Jews — who wished to see Jews where none were.247
Pope Honorius II was already suffering when he was exposed to the strong counter-pressure of the two groups. When the anti-Jewish Cardinals recognised that the Jew-friendly block of Pierleoni’s gained more and more in strength and had the voices of most Cardinals in their pocket, they applied cunning. Upon the urging of the energetic, resolute French Cardinal Aimerico, the Chancellor of the Roman Church, the fatally sick Pope was suddenly conveyed to a monastery, San Gregorio, situated on a mountain. In the midst of the disputes between the two parties, they agreed with Honorius that the new Pope should be chosen by eight Cardinals, who were apparently appointed by the ruling Pope. Pierleoni was also among them. These Cardinals betook themselves to the deathbed of the Pope and awaited the end, in order to be able to choose the new Pope.
Honorius died — as if ordained by divine providence — just at the time when Pierleoni and Jonathan were not present. The six other Cardinals rapidly buried the dead Pope and then in San Gregorio secretly elected the virtuous anti-Jewish Cardinal of Sant’Angelo, Gregorio Papareschi, as Pope, who took on the name Innocent II.
When Pierleoni, who already almost saw himself as Pope, learned that Papareschi, one of his rivals, was already chosen as Pope, he did not, however, regard himself as defeated, but — according to Gregorovius — “went, supported by his brothers Leo, Giordano, Roger, Uguccione and numerous clients, to St. Peter’s and forced an entry. He had himself dedicated as Pope by Pietro di Porto, stormed the Lateran, placed himself on the Papal throne in this Church, went to Santa Maria Mayor and confiscated the Church treasure. In the whole of Rome civil war raged, and thousands greedily stretched their hands out for the gold which Anacletus scattered.”248
Without doubt, Pierleoni, as far as Simony was concerned, was a worthy pupil of his predecessor, the likewise Jewish Simon Magus, and exceeded him where possible on grounds of the centuries long experience which the Jews had gathered. With the most diverse means, he attained that more than two thirds of the Cardinals chose him as Pope, and took on the name Anacletus II. This obese Jew rapidly made himself master of the situation and all the world applauded him, while Innocent II, with his loyal Cardinals, had to flee and withdrew into the Palladium, where the Frangipani protected him. The troops of Pierleoni attempted in vain to storm the Palladium. But since Innocent — as Gregorovius remarks — “foresaw how the gold of the enemy would penetrate through the walls, he fled in April or May to the Trastevere, where he kept himself concealed in the tower of his family. Anacletus in the meantime calmly celebrated the Easter Festival, excommunicated his opponent and replaced the Cardinals, who were opposed to him, through others. Through the fall of the Frangipani, Innocent was without protection, and he was left no other choice than to flee.”249
Seen with human eyes, everything was lost for Holy Church. The triumph of the “Jewish Fifth Column” in the clergy seemed final, and its centuries long dream of the conquest of the Papacy had finally become a reality. Christianity on the other hand had apparently lost the struggle against the Synagogue.
SOUND FAMILIAR?: "The accusations against the cardinal mentioned were among others the following: 1. Under the mask of an apparently zealous, honest Christianity he paid homage in secret to Judaism. He concealed this fact behind pious eloquent sermons — for Pierleoni was one of the best preachers of his time. In addition he cloaked his Jewish belief with good works" THE JEWS ARE FINALLY IN CONTROL OF ROME BUT HOLY MOTHER CHURCH CANNOT BE FOUND THERE TODAY.
In a letter to the German Emperor Lothar Saint Bernard writes among other things: “It is a disgrace for Christ that a Jew sits on the throne of St. Peter’s.” With this the Church scholar had struck the sore point and alluded to the seriousness of the situation. For it was simply impossible that a Jew, an enemy of Holy Church, was Pope. In the letter to the Emperor it is stated among other things: “Anacletus has not even a good reputation with his friends, while Innocent is illustrious beyond all doubt.” ANACLETUS ALL OVER AGAIN
He had himself dedicated as Pope by Pietro di Porto, stormed the Lateran, placed himself on the Papal throne in this Church, went to Santa Maria Mayor and confiscated the Church treasure. In the whole of Rome civil war raged, and thousands greedily stretched their hands out for the gold which Anacletus scattered.”
TODAY, HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF: Seen with human eyes, everything was lost for Holy Church. The triumph of the “Jewish Fifth Column” in the clergy seemed final, and its centuries long dream of the conquest of the Papacy had finally become a reality. Christianity on the other hand had apparently lost the struggle against the Synagogue. GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED!
ANTI-POPE ANACLETUS & THE ANTI-POPES OF THE APOSTATE "CHURCH" -- THE SIMILARITIES ARE STRIKING PART TWO
February 12, 2014
Taken from "The Plot against the Church"
SAINT BERNARD AND SAINT NORBERT FREE THE CHURCH FROM THE CLUTCHES OF JEWRY
In this case divine providence — as promised — came to the aid of the Church and allowed capable men to come forward, who were resolved to sacrifice everything for the salvation of Catholicism. These leaders recognised at the given moment — through the aid of God — the whole extent of the disaster which had occurred and of the approaching catastrophe and flung themselves fully and completely, with selflessness, highest mysticism and great infectious energy into the struggle against the Synagogue and its supporters. Thus Saint Irenaeus appeared when Jewish Gnosticism threatened to split Christianity. In the same way Saint Athanasius, the great anti-Jewish leader appeared when the heresy of the Jew Arius had almost uprooted the Church, and thus appeared later under similar circumstances Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Ambrose of Milan, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, Saint Isidore of Seville, St. Felix and the archbishop Agobardo, Amolon and many others, who all — illuminated by divine grace — mercilessly combated the Jews, the centuries old enemies of Holy Church and also their “Fifth Column,” their heresies and revolutionary movement.
Who would now come to the aid of the Church, since it passed through perhaps the most difficult crisis since its origin? Who would be the anti-Jewish leaders, whom Christ had chosen in this case for salvation of Holy Church?
As usual, God’s help was revealed through the appearance of two great fighters: Saint Bernard, Church scholar and Abbot of Clairveaux, and Saint Norbert, founder of the Order which bears his name, and archbishop of Magdeburg, who was related to the German Imperial family.
When Saint Bernard received news of the disastrous events in Rome, he made the rare decision to give up his peaceful quiet life in a monastery, in order to throw himself into a hard, uncomfortable, sorrowful and dangerous struggle, which in addition was already regarded as lost, since the Jewish Pope, thanks to his gold and the support which he continued to receive, was complete master of the situation. Innocent II on the other hand, forsaken and in flight, was excommunicated by Anacletus, and everything seemed lost for him. According to the opinion of important theologians and historians, he could in addition scarcely make his claims valid, since his election did not correspond to Church Law. Saint Bernard took on this already almost lost cause, because he was convinced that it was a good cause and Holy Church ought not in this manner and way to fall into the hands of its worst enemy, Jewry.
He proceeded from the correct standpoint and concerned himself neither with the majority of the 23 Cardinals who had voted for Anacletus, and the six who chose Innocent, nor with how the election had proceeded. In a letter to the German Emperor Lothar he writes among other things: “It is a disgrace for Christ that a Jew sits on the throne of St. Peter’s.” With this the Church scholar had struck the sore point and alluded to the seriousness of the situation. For it was simply impossible that a Jew, an enemy of Holy Church, was Pope. In the letter to the Emperor it is stated among other things: “Anacletus has not even a good reputation with his friends, while Innocent is illustrious beyond all doubt.”
The Abbot Ernold, a contemporary biographer of Saint Bernard, reports that Pierleoni, as ambassador and cardinal, had collected enormous riches, “and had later robbed the Churches.” And when even the bad Christians who followed him refused to destroy the golden chalices and crucifixes in order to melt them down, Anacletus had Jews put this plan into action. The latter destroyed the sacred cups and engravings with enthusiasm. These objects were sold, and thanks to this money Anacletus was — as was reported — in the position of persecuting the supporters of Innocent II. Bishop Hubert of Lucca, Andreas Dandolo, the Doge of Venice, the abbot Anselmo of Grembloux and other chroniclers and historians accuse the Jewish anti-Pope on account of this and other grave crimes.250 In this struggle principally the German Emperor, but also the King of France were of greatest importance, for Germany and France were then the most powerful Catholic states. Saint Bernard, supported by his great friend Saint Norbert, used all his power in persuading the two irresolute monarchs to support Innocent. For this purpose he wrote them letters and undertook all possible steps. Louis VI of France could not make up his mind and had a Council called, which, corresponding to his wish, took place in Etampes.251 Through his eloquence and his zeal Saint Bernard there attained that the Fathers of the Synod declared for Innocent. He cited the already mentioned grounds and in addition proved that Innocent was the first to be chosen and that this first election would be valid until it was legally annulled, even if later the overwhelming majority of Cardinals had voted for Anacletus. In addition he proved that Innocent had been consecrated as Pope by the competent Cardinal bishop of Ostia. The courage and energy of the heroic Cardinal Aimerico, who had rapidly and secretly buried the dead Pope and thus in somewhat unusual manner hastened the election of Innocent, were now very much of advantage. Holy Church, Christianity and the whole of mankind must be grateful to this courageous, active Cardinal, and maintain his memory, for with his action he began the struggle for the salvation of Holy Church and thus contributed to the salvation of the whole world. If the Jews had been successful in controlling Christianity eight centuries ago, then the catastrophe would have occurred several centuries earlier, which now threatens the globe in terrible forms. Islam was then also threatened through the network of secret revolutionary organisations of Jews — such as those of the “Batinis” and of the “Murderers” — which wished to control and destroy it.
Innocent II had fled from Italy to France and had now, since the Council of Etampes supported his — (so he believed) — already lost cause, hoped once more. Upon the recognition and support of the Council followed the very valuable, temporal support of the King of France, who from now on became the principal mainstay of the legal Pope against his rival, the anti-Pope, as the Synod then described the latter. The French monarch followed the guiding principles of Saint Bernard, and there were no further discussions concerning which of the two elected Popes was the legally justified, but which was the more worthy — as the famous Abbot of Saint Denis, Sugerius, expressed it. In the face of the overwhelming activity of Saint Bernard the skilled diplomacy of Anacletus failed, who praised devout Catholicism and attempted with all attainable means to secure himself the support of the King of France. He pretended excessive piety and based his plans for reform on that he wished to give back to the Church the purity of its first period, which was always a very popular slogan, because it went back to praiseworthy and noble motives. He had for this reason also taken on the name of the first successor of St. Peter, i.e. of Pope Anacletus I. We are here thus dealing, from all appearances, with one of the first manifestations of that “apocalyptic beast” which outwardly looks like a lamb — i.e. like our Lord Jesus Christ — but nevertheless acts like a dragon. Not in vain was Anacletus held in that time by Saints, Bishops, Clergy and Laity to be the Anti-Christ or, in less crass cases, as forerunner of the Anti-Christ.
The conduct of Lothar, the German Emperor, was to be decisive in this struggle. He remarked quite correctly that this affair concerned the Church itself, and therefore a second Council was called in Würzburg. Here Saint Norbert intervened decisively so that the German Bishops granted Innocent their full support. The almost decisive battle was, however, to be fought at the Holy Council of Rheims, towards the end of the year 1131. This Synod signified a defeat for Pedro Pierleoni, for there the Bishops of England, Castile and Aragon recognised Innocent as the legal Pope and in this respect joined themselves to the French and German bishops, who had already previously recognised him. At this Synod Pierleoni was excommunicated in addition. Concerning this we must recognise that the religious Orders also played a decisive role in this struggle. They then recognised the danger which Jewry represented for the Church, and held Anacletus for the greatest evil which had so far threatened Christianity. Passionately and dynamically, they directed the activity of the monasteries at saving Holy Church from this deadly threat.
Saint Bernard became involved in the schism of Anacletus in 1130, when Innocent II was elected Pope, but was rejected by Cardinal Pierlone, who wished himself to be named. He arranged another election involving factors whom he controlled, and was, of course, elected and took the name Anacletus II. A council was called at Etampes to solve this outrage, and it was Bernard’s influence which resulted in the pronouncement of "Anathema" on Anacletus, and the final seating of Innocent II as the one and only Pope. The Kings of England, France, and Germany were all concerned and involved, and became impressed with Bernard's wisdom and influence. Bernard, on the side of Innocent II, fought vigorously in support of the Church, and his prescience and powerful personality were mostly responsible for the ultimate solution to this unspeakable blot on Church history.
On June 6th the Catholic Church celebrates the memory of St Norbert, a bishop who for the last 4 years of his life endeavoured to undermine Anacletus. Norbert was chosen archbishop of Magdeburg in 1126. He became an important church figure four years later when he defended Pope Innocent II, whose claim to the papacy was threatened by Antipope Anacletus II. Norbert won the German church for Innocent’s cause and influenced the German king Lothar II/III to defend Innocent. Our current crisis of Antipope Francis is the result (among other things) of two calamities recurring simultaneously, each of which has occurred separately before. Namely the great loss of faith during Arianism and the reign of an Antipope who favors the Jews as "our elder brothers" as in the days of Antipope Anacletus.
Catholic prophecy tells us the Great Catholic Monarch to come will be a man of both French and German descent. The wonders of God's providence! History will repeat itself in one person! Just as in the days of the Antipope Anacletus it was France and Germany who stood up for the Church and the true pope: Innocent II who had to flee Rome and was thought of as a "lost cause".
The Apostate church with all it's ruin and chaos rules the minds and hearts of the multitudes because in our time more than ever before, the chief strength of the wicked lies in the cowardice and weakness of good men and the absence of true Catholic religious orders to combat the heresies, apostasies, and lies which disguise themselves under the veil of "truth".
The reign of the Holy Pontiff will be aided by the Great Monarch (as foretold for our forbearance in Catholic prophecy) in much the same way as occurred in the days of Innocent II. "Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold this is new: for it hath already gone before in the ages that were before us." - Ecclesiastes 1;10
Unfortunately at the present day, when Holy Church is threatened to such a high degree by Communism and by the “Jewish Fifth Column” in the clergy, no sign is present for the enormous strength of the religious Orders. These could perhaps save the situation, if they equipped themselves for the struggle. They spend the day with devout services, which are very praiseworthy, but which under the present circumstances prevent them from dedicating themselves to the main task of saving the Church. In our opinion the Orders, when they awake from their lethargy, must take note that today — exactly as in the time of Pierleoni — it is impossible to perform all devout services since these take up their whole time. It would be necessary to abandon a part of these for the moment, in order to have sufficient time for the struggle for the salvation of Christianity. As a result a decisive step would already be taken.
May God, our Lord, illumine the highest Fathers of the Orders and lead before their eyes the necessity of a supreme decisive resolution in this matter! The prayers and the activity of the rules of the Order are very important; however, it is even more important to preserve Holy Church from the Jewish-Communist danger, which threatens to destroy her. Saint Bernard and a great number of monks had to leave their quiet monasteries and disregard the strict rules of their Order (naturally with corresponding permission), in order to go upon the street and save Christianity. And they had success! After the Council of Rheims Pierleoni could still only count on the support of Italy (for the greater part) and especially on that of his brother-in-law, the Duke Roger II or Sicily, who ruled practically the entire peninsula. The marriage of the converted Jewess Pierleoni, the sister of the anti-Pope, nevertheless possessed a value in itself. This marriage, concluded for strategic reasons, now revealed itself as useful. However, in order to finally conquer the Jew on the throne of St. Peter’s a military invasion, a kind of crusade, was necessary. Saint Bernard and Saint Norbert persuaded Lothar, the Emperor of Germany, to undertake this. Accompanied by a modest-sized army, the Emperor met together with Innocent in North Italy and advanced unhindered as far as Rome, for many Roman noblemen betrayed Anacletus at the last minute. Lothar brought Innocent to the Throne in the Lateran, while Pierleoni fled to Sant’Angelo and had St. Peter under control. Therefore the Emperor was crowned in the Lateran by Innocent. But since Roger of Sicily then advanced at the head of a powerful army, Lothar had to order a retreat. For this reason the Pope could also not stay in Rome and had to flee. The Jewish anti-Pope was again master of the situation there. Innocent had withdrawn to Pisa and in this city summoned a great Council, in which Bishops of the whole of Christianity and a great number of abbots participated, who played an important role in this struggle. Among them was found St. Bernard, who, as always, conducted the struggle.
A year later Lothar advanced again to Italy, in order to set the legal Pope in Rome and to drive out the Jewish usurper. The conduct of the German Emperor is really worthy of note, for at those moments, critical for the Church, he left to one side his personal interests and the resentments of the Empire on account of the hard investiture dispute, and placed himself fully and completely for the salvation of Christianity.
If only there existed in the present world crisis some men, who imitated this noble conduct, placing behind them personal interests and national requirements and forgot often unfounded spite, in favour of the uniting of all peoples in the common struggle for liberation against Jewish Imperialism and its Freemasonic and Communist dictatorships!
With justice wrote Innocent II to Emperor Lothar during the terrible struggle: “The Church has chosen you — thanks to Divine intercession — as lawgiver like a second Justinian and has chosen you to combat the heretical infamy of the Jews like a second Constantine.”
In this campaign Lothar was in fact successful in defeating Roger and caused him to retreat to Sicily, but he could not take Rome, where to the disgrace of all Christianity the Jewish anti-Pope remained in office. When Lothar left Italy with his armies, Roger of Sicily won it back almost completely, and Pierleoni seemed again to gain dangerously in power. The concern of all Christianity increased more and more, for the power of the anti-Pope again became threatening. Arnulf, the bishop of Liseaux, Manfred, the Bishop of Mantua and other respected Prelates described the latter simply as a Jew. Archbishop Walter of Ravenna called Anacletus’s schism “Heresy of Jewish faithlessness”, and the rabbi Louis Israel Newman gives the assurance that the party of Innocent held Anacletus for the “Anti-Christ.” These opinions were communicated to Emperor Lothar by the Cardinals, who supported the legal Pope. Innocent made into a battle-cry the assertion that the theft of the throne by Anacletus was a “foolish Jewish falsehood.” The Rabbi, eager for knowledge, whom we quote, closes his report about the struggle with the following commentary: “The ‘Jewish Pope’ held his position successfully up to his death on 25th January 1138.” This Jewish leader, a very honourable historian, thus admits quite clearly and without reserve or fear that Pierleoni was a Jew and describes him expressly as “Jewish Pope” while he risks at the same time to call Innocent II an anti-Pope.252
When the Jewish usurper in Rome was buried with all Papal honours, his Cardinals’ collegium — whose members, so it is said, almost all secretly practised the Jewish religion — were concerned with appointing a new Pope or, better, anti-Pope. The choice fell upon Cardinal Gregor, who was named with the approval and support of Roger of Sicily. The new Pope took on the name Victor IV. Saint Bernard had in the meantime through his restless sermons and through the pressure of the German armies for the legal Pope been able to conquer the chief bulwarks of Pierleonis, such as Milan and other Italian cities. Finally the eloquent St. Bernard was also successful in taking Rome itself. During the last days the Jewish anti-Pope had to once again take refuge in St. Peter’s and had also occupied the powerful palace of Sant’Angelo. The party of Pierleoni, however, became smaller and smaller and gradually dissolved, so that for the new anti-Pope Victor IV the situation was practically untenable. Thanks to the eloquence of Saint Bernard, he surrendered.
In this episode we encounter anew the tactics which play the decisive role for Jewry in all its political struggles: a Jewish party, or one controlled by Jews, attempts, if it believes itself lost, to prevent that the imminent defeat becomes total destruction or catastrophe by surrendering at the right time to the enemy and begging him for mercy. Or it negotiates the permission to be able to retain the highest possible positions by its promising subjection and loyalty. If this Jewish power remains preserved from destruction, it often retains valuable posts in the new government of the victor. However, it does not give thanks for this, but in secret instigates conspiracies, in order to gain powers again, to extend them in time and at the given moment to carry out the treacherous stroke which destroys the blissfully trusting, great-hearted enemy who gave the ungrateful opponent, instead of destroying him when it lay in its power, the possibility of gathering new strength and recovering for a new blow. This has been repeated again and again in the history of the struggles between Christians and Jews for more than a thousand years and was one of the principal reasons for the re-enlivement of the Synagogue after its great defeats. Unfortunately, however, the time had come, when the roles were changed.
Giordano and the other brothers of Pedro Pierleoni pretended to repent and legged for forgiveness, abjured all heresy and reconciled themselves with the legal Pope. With their hypocrisy they touched the heart of Innocent II and Saint Bernard, who magnanimously pardoned them. Instead of casting them down, the Pope left to them their positions at the Papal court. Later he even honoured them through homage and offices in the intention of achieving a stable permanent uniting of the Church. He attempted to win over the Jews with extreme kindness, so that they would perhaps become ashamed through such great-heartedness, and finally honestly repent.
On the Church level Innocent proceeded more energetically. In 1139 he called a Ecumenical Council, the second of the Lateran, which rejected the teachings of Arnaldo de Brescia and Pedro Bruys and simultaneously declared the actions of Anacletus as illegal and deposed all priests, bishops and cardinals. To put it briefly, all clergy who had been appointed by Pierleoni were declared to have lost all their consecrations,253 above all particularly those who were regarded as schismatics. The Generality regarded those as schismatics who tolerated heretics and such of Jewish origin among themselves, in a word, all who in a concealed manner adhered to Judaism. Thus the Holy Father purged the clergy of secret Jews of the “Fifth Column”, purified the hierarchy and made with one blow all Jewish infiltration into the clergy impossible, which was naturally carried out under the protection of the “Jewish Pope” — as the renowned Rabbi Newman calls him. The liberality of the Pope in the political domain towards the defeated Giordano Pierleoni and his brothers was to become fateful for the Holy See. It must be remarked that Saint Bernard had certainly influenced the Pope in this policy of forgiveness. The former believed, in his over-great kindness, that Holy Church could perhaps soften the hardened hearts of the Jews if it pursued a different policy. Saint Bernard admittedly combated the schisms and heresy of the Jews, but exercised extreme caution and did not wish that they should be persecuted or any harm done to them. Put in another way, he wished to tame wolves with kindness.
As always the Jews abused the kindness of Saint Bernard and proved irrefutably that it is impossible to make wolves into obedient lambs. The occurrences of the past century have proved this and forced the Holy Church to proceed energetically and often mercilessly in her struggle against the Jews. The bonfires of the Inquisition were largely the consequence of the liberal policy of forgiveness. The tolerance and kindness preached by St. Bernard had failed lamentably.