Last updated by The POOG on January 02, 2023.

The worldwide Catholic Church is governed from the Vatican in Rome. I am neither a Catholic nor a religious scholar and will undoubtedly get some of the finer aspects of the Catholic Church wrong.

Let’s begin with the governance structure.

The Holy See is the name given to the government of the Roman Catholic Church, which is led by the pope as the bishop of Rome. As such, the Holy See’s authority extends over Catholics throughout the world.

Source: Encyclopedia Britannica.

The College of Cardinals is analogous to a national governing body such as a parliament, a senate, a congress, or similar institution.

Cardinals fall into two group, electors and non-electors. The electors are the ones who meet to choose a new pope. Cardinals rise up through their ecclesiastical ranks in their home nations and are appointed Cardinal by the Pope[8], either as an elector or non-elector.

One must assume that in the choice of a pope, the electors will discuss and promote in debate, the merits of candidates, vote, and if necessary repeat the process until one candidate is successfully chosen. One may also assume that that the merits evaluated are consistent with the electors’ beliefs and agendas. In terms of doctrinal belief of each elector, it is assumed that there is a core doctrine, a ‘kernel’, that in the process is agreed upon, and manifests in the new pope.

It is then reasonable to assume that the Pope, in choosing new cardinals from among the global pool of bishops and archbishops, will choose those whose core beliefs and demonstrated ministry will largely contain the same doctrinal kernel.

The Pope, in choosing a cardinal as an elector, can further ensure that the kernel’s self-consistency remains and is strengthened.

Who Is Pope Frances?

His biography at a macro level is:

Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected the 266th pope of the Roman Catholic Church in March 2013, becoming Pope Francis. He is the first pope from the Americas.

Prior to his election as pope, Bergoglio served as archbishop of Buenos Aires from 1998 to 2013 (succeeding Antonio Quarracino), as cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church of Argentina from 2001 to 2013, and as president of the Bishops’ Conference of Argentina from 2005 to 2011.

Source: Biography

The more important aspect of Jorge Bergoglio is his communist ideology which is being introduced into Vatican doctrine. George Neumayr[12] describes Bergoglio’s early exposure to communist thinking through a mentor, Esther Ballestrino. Several writers[9][10][11] have discussed and documented Bergoglio’s communistic tendencies. I will not develop the idea myself.

Jorge Bergoglio is clearly a communist and is leading the church in the direction of a global communist totalitarian state alongside the World Economic Forum (WEF)[5]. Cardinal Peter Turkson represented the vatican at Davos in January 2021 with the message “The dignity of the human person is the one thing that you cannot compromise on[13].

The Papal Encyclicals

Encyclical letters are like policy statements for the Catholic Church. Along with other letters and documents that come out of the Holy See, they form the doctrinal position, thinking and teaching of the Catholic Church.

These documents can be massive in size, a collaborative work of many scholars and ecclesiastical bureaucrats in the Vatican. They are populated with footnotes that largely refer to earlier church documents and encyclicals issued under prior popes. The evolution of thinking is therefore apparent.

The current Pope Frances has issued a number of encyclicals that are in part, following a globalist agenda[1]. We will discuss these in turn beginning with Laudato Si’[4].

Laudato Si’

This is a long – 184 pages – and dense document. It has a dual focus, the ecology of natural systems and the ecology of human social systems. Their interconnectedness is emphasized throughout.

This is not a revolutionary document, but an evolutionary extension of a large body of previous writings of the Holy See and recent popes, as cited in footnotes in the document.

To begin, let us define ‘secular humanism’ (emphasis added) as:

Secular humanism propounds a rational ethics based on human experience. It is consequentialist: ethical choices are judged by their results. Secular humanist ethics appeals to science, reason, and experience to justify its ethical principles. Observers can evaluate the real-world consequences of moral decisions and intersubjectively affirm their conclusions. Kurtz and other secular humanists argue that all human societies, even deeply religious ones, invariably construct consensus moralities on consequentialist principles. Millennia of human experience have given rise to a core of “common moral decencies” shared by almost all.

Source: Free Inquiry: Secular Humanism Defined

The 17 Paragraph Preamble

Right from the start the document focuses on the need to reform secular structures along the lines laid out by the UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF):

Every effort to protect and improve our world entails profound changes in “lifestyles, models of production and consumption, and the established structures of power which today govern societies”

… “eliminating the structural causes of the dysfunctions of the world economy and correcting models of growth which have proved incapable of ensuring respect for the environment”.

Laudato Si’

We see, then, that Laudato Si’ expresses a strong secular humanist dialectic alongside an ecclesiastical one of the individual Christian.

The preamble lays out the factors causing environmental degradation and the individual’s responsibility in terms of their lifestyle.

Chapter 1

The first section that deals with pollution and climate change gets almost all of it wrong except for environmental degradation and non-CO2 sources of pollution. Waste and a throw-away culture are identified as part of the problem.

Section 2 deals with issues around clean water resources. Section 3 explores loss of biodiversity and natural resources. Section 4 discusses the degradation of the quality of human life. Section 5 raises the issue of inequality. References to the alleged climate problem and CO2 keep cropping up.

Overall, individual lifestyles but also the actions of institutions, organizations, corporations and governments that act without proper regard for the environment are the major problem. The solution then must occur at the same level and to a proportionate degree.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2 explores the human root of the ecological problems.

The Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute or inviolable, and has stressed the social purpose of all forms of private property.

ibid. p. 69.

Saint John Paul II is then quoted as stating that (emphasis added):

God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone.

… the Church does indeed defend the legitimate right to private property, but she also teaches no less clearly that there is always a social mortgage on all private property, in order that goods may serve the general purpose that God gave them.

ibid. p. 69.

This is fundamentally a requirement for the power of a communist state to overrule the individual right of private property for the purpose of the “general good“. This effectively nullifies the right to personal property.

Chapter 3

Section II of the chapter is titled “The Globalization of the Technocratic Paradigm”. Technocracy is seen to be the dominant modern paradigm behind our ecological crisis. Natural and human inputs to the technological corporations are not properly valued. As noted by the authors from Vatican II documents, people “were created with a vocation to work“. And as Vatican II urged, “we continue to prioritize the goal of access to steady employment for everyone”.

The need for state control is revealed in the authors’ statment:

To ensure economic freedom from which all can effectively benefit, restraints occasionally have to be imposed on those possessing greater resources and financial power.

ibid p.96

This seems to be saying that to achieve economic freedom, it must be removed in the process.

Chapter 4

This chapter proposes an integration between social and natural ecology. Social ecology

is necessarily institutional, and gradually extends to the whole of society, from the primary social group, the family, to the wider local, national and international communities. … to regulate human relationships.

ibid pp. 106,107

They do recognize dangers associated with institutional regulation of society:

Attempts to resolve all problems through uniform regulations or technical interventions can lead to overlooking the complexities of local problems

ibid p. 108

The chapter continues with a discussion of the social re-engineering that will be required. This will be the case particularly in cities where “the notion of the common good, a central and unifying principle of social ethics” will be a necessarily dominant theme. Hammering home the notion of the common good, they state:

for social peace, the stability and security provided by a certain order which cannot be achieved without particular concern for distributive justice; whenever this is violated, violence always ensues. Society as a whole, and the state in particular, are obliged to defend and promote the common good.

ibid p. 117

Chapter 5

Chapter 5 deals with solutions from a global perspective. As they assert:

A global consensus is essential for confronting the deeper problems, which cannot be resolved by unilateral actions on the part of individual countries.

ibid p. 122

The focus is on a global approach to CO2 reduction, through something they call “the internationalization of environmental costs“. India and China appear to be singled out although not by name. The limitations of carbon credits are discussed. Without directly calling for it, they infer the need for a global government:

Global regulatory norms are needed to impose obligations and prevent unacceptable actions ...

… an agreement on systems of governance for the whole range of so-called “global commons”.

it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, with functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments, and empowered to impose sanctions.

…there is urgent need of a true world political authority, …

ibid pp. 128-129

Yet they make this contradictory observation:

Unless citizens control political powernational, regional and municipal – it will not be possible to control damage to the environment.

New forms of cooperation and community organization can be encouraged …

ibid pp. 131-133

Chapter 6

The final chapter deals with the spiritual dimension of the ecological crisis. I had mentioned before the documents attack on individualism. In this chapter it is prominently promoted:

If we can overcome individualism, we will truly be able to develop a different lifestyle and bring about significant changes in society.

… “myths” of a modernity grounded in a utilitarian mindset (individualism, unlimited progress, competition, consumerism, the unregulated market).

This task [fixing social problems] “will make such tremendous demands of man that he could never achieve it by individual initiative or even by the united effort of men bred in an individualistic way.

ibid pp 153,160

The individual is to be subservient to the common good to achieve freedom from “consumerism”. Yet in a remarkable admission they state that “those really free are the minority who wield economic and financial power“.

Conclusion

This document has strong support for the argument that people have to be socially regulated because they cannot “properly” regulate themselves. On one hand individual responsibility is emphasized throughout while individualism is rejected as undesirable. Chapters 4 and 5 are clear in the Church’s call for a global communist government along the lines promoted by the UN in Agendas 2030 and 2050, and the World Economic Forum in the Great Reset. It explains the close alignment the Pope has recently shown to these institutions.

This is core Marxist ideology and a fundamental misinterpretation of the scriptures that emphasize individual responsible behaviour while teaching nothing on the responsibility of the state.

Fratelli Tutti

This is a recent encyclical (2020, link in the section at the end of this article). At 93 pages it is half the length of Laudato Si’. In reading it,note when he is taking about human action and when he is talking about Christ’s teaching. For statements and ideas, consider their scriptural basis if any. By this I don’t mean things that follow from a scriptural precept but things that are explicitly stated in scripture. For example, consider the term “common good“. It sounds very Christian but is not present in scripture.

The 8 Paragraph Preamble

Bergoglio states that Saint Francis of Assisi is a major source of his understanding of “fraternity” and was the inspiration for this encyclical as well as Laudato Si’.

Saint Francis expressed the essence of a fraternal openness that allows us to acknowledge, appreciate and love each person, regardless of physical proximity, regardless of where he or she was born or lives.

Fratelli Tutti, p.1

The preamble talks about aspects of the life and teaching of Saint Francis. Bergoglio notes that:

Yet there Francis was able to welcome true peace into his heart and free himself of the desire to wield power over others.

Ibid. P.2

We also see in the meeting with the Grand Imam Ahmad Al-Tayyeb, his desire for a universal coexistence with other religions.

Chapter 1

Chapter 1 presents an overview of many human activities which act counter to fraternity, being an expression of personal interests over the interests of others. His identification of the mechanism used to control people is very good. His term for this is “social sense“. He considers nationalism to be antithetical to fraternity.

He does an excellent job of describing the multitude of social and economic injustices which plague our world

In paragraph 15 he refers to the desirability to “advance the common good“. This is a key ideological precept of socialism and communism. Another term from the same ideology that he uses is “solidarity” (para. 10). In paragraph 24, he calls for a “global effort” to correct a particular wrong:

… efforts to eliminate this phenomenon [slavery] also demand a common and, indeed, a global effort on the part of various sectors of society.

Ibid. para. 24.

When propagated to solutions for other problems of injustice we set the stage for the need for a global government controlling the effort.

In paragraph 32, he says:

… we are a global community, all in the same boat, where one person’s problems are the problems of all. Once more we realized that no one is saved alone; we can only be saved together.

Ibid. para 32

I was stunned by these sentences. I dealt with the issue in A Most High Heresy.

The rest of the chapter describes how technology can be destructive to the individual and society when misused.

In paragraphs 51-53 he suggests a positive form of nationalism while continuing to describe the aspects of our culture, particularly our technology, that damage the individual. In 54 he reiterates his position that “no one is saved alone“.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2 begins with a parable that instructs us how to live our lives in a Godly manner. I think this is the point where Bergoglio goes off track. The parable instructs us how to modify our life. It says nothing about the culture that we live in. If every man reformed his own life, we would have the culture that Bergoglio dreams of. To declare a culture and require all men to conform to it is the way of man, not God. That is socialism.

In trying to pin down what Bergoglio is getting at, consider Paragraph 66 on the example of the Good Samaritan:

Jesus’ parable summons usto rediscover our vocation as citizens of our respective nations and of the entire world, builders of a new social bond. This summons

Ibid.. para 66.

The key word is “citizens“. A citizen is a role in a sociopolitical order, a nation state. This is not a domain that Christ was concerned about. apart from “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s“. He goes on to say:

This summons is ever new, yet it is grounded in a fundamental law of our being: we are called to direct society to the pursuit of the common good and, with this purpose in mind, to persevere in consolidating its political and social order, its fabric of relations, its human goals.

Ibid.

In 77 and 78 he subtly reveals the goal. Individual action in itself is not enough. Rather, we need to form a community of like-minded individuals which will be stronger than the sum of its parts. This is communistic in nature.

Yet let us not do this alone, as individuals. … we too are called to unite as a family that is stronger than the sum of small individual members. For “the whole is greater than the part, but it is also greater than the sum of its parts”.

Ibid. para 78.

In summary of the chapter, Bergoglio outlines the behavioural basis of brotherly love to which we are called. He is scripturally and spiritually correct. Yet he includes the subtle notion that we arecalled to unite into some form of communal action. There is no scriptural basis for this call but it it is the call of socialism.

Chapters 3 and 4

In this chapter he is expanding the basis for a universal love or fraternity (e.g. 106). However, real love exists only as from one individual to another. Universal love or “universal fraternity” is a meaningless abstraction. He talks a lot about “human rights” or simply “rights”. This is simply not a teaching of Christ. He goes on to make the appeal for the socialist state, of course based on his principles. I think this statement sums it up most clearly so far.

What we need in fact are states and civil institutions that are present and active, that look beyond the free and efficient working of certain economic, political or ideological systems, and are primarily concerned with individuals and the common good.

Ibid. para 108.

Paragraphs 118 through 127 go into a long argument on “rights” and against the notion of private property apart from what the state may grant. The argument or justification is for communism. In the next paragraph we see his argument for what is the abolition of private property since such is always, according to him, subject to common usage.

The right to private property is always accompanied by the primary and prior principle of the subordination of all private property to the universal destination of the earth’s goods [i.e. the common good], and thus the right of all to their use.

Ibid. para 123.

Rather than a world shaped by individual Christian ethics we are given a globalist communist paradigm:

For a real and lasting peace will only be possible “on the basis of a global ethic of solidarity and cooperation in the service of a future shaped by interdependence and shared responsibility in the whole human family”.

Ibid. para. 127.

Chapter 4 argues for a globalist approach to governance of initiatives to achieve the “‘common good” which now has a global scale.

Chapter 5

This chapter analyzes modern political systems and forwards ideas to achieve the notion of “democracy as government by the people”.

In this chapter he begins to examine global political organization that can be built to administer the common good. The discussion is far away from the individual and hovering around the level of the United Nations. As I read 179, I realized that the common good is never really defined. Nor is the mechanism for defining it identified. This is key because the common good is a unifying underlying goal of all he discusses and whoever defines it has great power.

In 180 he elevates politics and the common good to the highest form of expression of charity or love:

I appeal for a renewed appreciation of politics as “a lofty vocation and one of the highest forms of charity, inasmuch as it seeks the common good”.

Ibid. para. 180.

Although it raises his thesis of communism to the highest level, there is no scriptural basis that I know of for any of this.

He continues by describing the ideal politician, and as a result, a political institution to which he transfers characteristics of charity something that which cannot be done to an inanimate system. Still, this is what is needed as he notes that:

Good politics combines love with hope and with confidence in the reserves of goodness present in human hearts.

Ibid. para. 196.

In summary, if politicians act always with a sense of love, their institutions become more benign and helpful to their constituents. It raises the question of whether I can act with real love towards individuals whom I will never know. I believe the answer is yes if it comes from the heart as he notes. It does not eliminate the problems around acting for the common good.

Chapter 6

Chapter 6 suggests that dialogue is the means to achieve fraternal love. In addressing how to fix the world he identifies “truth” as the key.

If society is to have a future, it must respect the truth of our human dignity and submit to that truth. Murder is not wrong simply because it is socially unacceptable and punished by law, but because of a deeper conviction.

What we call “truth” is not only the reporting of facts and events … . It is primarily the search for the solid foundations sustaining our decisions and our laws. This calls for acknowledging that the human mind is capable of transcending immediate concerns and grasping certain truths that are unchanging, as true now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason discovers universal values derived from that same nature.

Ibid. para. 207-208

This reference contains the key to the apostasy of the encyclical. There is no reference to God’s laws. Rather it is all the ability of the human mind and nature to determine a “truth” that can be the foundation of our social order.

Again in this chapter, the common good is used as the universal organizing principle that individuals must be subservient to (para. 221).

Chapter 7

On reflection, the end result of a fully realized Christian life may be identified as a common good, but it is the result and not the goal of such a life. This encyclical lists many good behavious that can be used but they are not put forward as behaviour to realize our personal Christ-like behaviour supporting our salvation, but rather as a human activity to achieve the common good.

He gives a good discussion of the evils of war, bringing it down to the individual level. In particular he talks about nuclear weapons. His solution is to create a global fund to fight the effects of war and other inequalities:

let us establish a global fund[245] that can finally put an end to hunger and favour development in the most impoverished countries,

Ibid. para. 262.

The rest of the chapter is a discussion of punishment by the state and particularly the death penalty.

Chapter 8

Chapter 8 develops the notion of a universal church. He recognizes that there are other doctrines beside that of the Gospels and the bible:

Others drink from other sources. For us the wellspring of human dignity and fraternity is in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

… the primacy given to relationship, to the encounter with the sacred mystery of the other, to universal communion with the entire human family, as a vocation of all”.[273]

Ibid. para 277.

He is in fact saying that we must accept the sacred teachings of other religions in order to create this universal communion of all souls. This is evident in his actions in moving towards a universal church based on solidarity, fraternity and a common good rather than the requirement that Christ laid out for his Church in Matthew: 16:13-19. And this is the basis for the schism developing in the Catholic Church.

Concluding Remarks

The problem is we have two paradigms to approach change in our world. The Christian paradigm is in fact brotherly love enacted by the individual as instructed by Christ. The other paradigm is socialism, a social construct built to coerce individuals to act towards a “common good” which simulates brotherly love but is an inert abstract concept.

We can aspire to a world that provides land, housing and work for all. This is the true path of peace, not the senseless and myopic strategy of sowing fear and mistrust in the face of outside threats. For a real and lasting peace will only be possible “on the basis of a global ethic of solidarity and cooperation

Ibid. para 127.

In fact in 132 he calls for “a form of global governance” to achieve his dream of global fraternal love.

The Wolf Is Lose in the Midst of the Flock

In reviewing Fratelli Tutti, I came across the site L’Osservatore Romano which appears to be an official Vatican news site. A world without war or weapons without fear is possible

Opposition to the Secular Shift and the Great Reset

We have already cited Cardinal Müller’s objection to Pope Francis[11]. To Müller’s voice we add that of others within the clerical ranks. One such voice is that of Father Mark Goring:

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, in a letter to president Trump[7], identified the evil of the Great Reset and the globalist agenda embraced by the Pope and the Vatican. He states:

… the fundamental rights of citizens and believers are denied in the name of a health emergency that is revealing itself more and more fully as instrumental to the establishment of an inhuman faceless tyranny.

A global plan called the Great Reset is underway. Its architect is a global élite that wants to subdue all of humanity, imposing coercive measures with which to drastically limit individual freedoms and those of entire populations.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano[7]

He then links the Vatican and Pope Frances directly to it:

In the religious sphere, this obstacle to evil is the Church, and in particular the papacy; in the political sphere, it is those who impede the establishment of the New World Order.

As is now clear, the one who occupies the Chair of Peter has betrayed his role from the very beginning in order to defend and promote the globalist ideology, supporting the agenda of the deep church, who chose him from its ranks.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano[7]

US Cardinal Raymond Burke has also condemned the secular shift to the great Reset:

Pope Francis As a Member of the Globalist Cabal

We have previously written of Francis’ close alignment with globalist interests like Klaus Schwab and the WEF. Following are some examples of such.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ys7A97fiU&feature=emb_logo

Spinning a Dream or a Delusion

In material just released from the Vatican[17], the Pope again puts forward his agenda which is to rebuild the world in concert with the Great Reset using similar lofty ideals. Echoing Rahm Emanuel’s famous “you never want to let a serious crisis go to waste“, he rejects nationalism for globalism. The problem is in the details – or total lack thereof, of how to get to where he wants to take the world. Rest assured it is not where his fellow globalists in the WEF want to go.

The Society of Jesus (Jesuits), Freemasonry and the Pope

I looked at this topic for two reasons. There are some who think Freemasonry is aligned with Jesuit thinking and Bergoglio is a Jesuit. The first topic of the relationship between the Jesuit order and Freemasonry has a complex history requiring a deep dive to explore it properly. Apparently the two were intertwined at one point but Freemasonry is currently rejected by the RCC.

An article by Jorma Jormakka titled Jesuits, Freemasons, Communists, Jews, Synarchy – same claims, details the interrelationships historically. Other articles can be found such as those at Vatican Assassins, that provide connections among the Society of Jesus, Freemasonry, the Illuminati, certain jews and other esoteric groups such as Theosophists. Some hold the head of the Jesuit order to be the “Black Pope”.

This is a rabbit hole that I do not want to go down viewing it as an unprofitable diversion. I do wish, however, to note that connections have existed and may still exist among some members, almost as a secret society which Freemasonry itself is. All of this forms the basis of secular humanism which is the philosophy underlying Vatican thinking of recent years.

The Fatima Prophecies

The Fatima Prophecies are held in high regard by the Catholic Church. The first is a vision of hell. The second[14], is of the post World War I era with the threat of terrible events and an even greater war to come. The Lady went on (emphasis added):

To prevent this, [war, famine, and persecutions against the Church] I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated.

Source: The Fatima Center.[14]

Instructions on the nature of the consecration and certain reparations to be enacted were given A third prophecy[15] was to be released in 1960 but the Holy See refused to release it until 2000. It is suspect in its content as it speaks about the bishops and cardinals themselves.

To date, the consecration has not been performed as instructed and the world is in the final stages of the spread of the “errors” of Russia – communism. In commentary provided[16]:

God has given the Pope today the same mission. The People of God of the New Testament likewise are unarmed, with their enemies in a position to destroy the Church. The tenets of Masonry and communism are being enforced more and more by the United Nations, as well as by the European Union and the United States. These forces are in an almost unilateral control of politics worldwide. Communism and Freemasonry, which are both built upon the same satanic foundation, are both antithetical to true Catholicism. Their poisonous and destructive tenets have been exposed and warned against numerous times by the Catholic Church.

Source: The Fatima Center.[16]

The Game Is On

Writing documents that become historical in the sense that they are still open long after the first sentences were laid down presents a challenge for presentation. We write top to bottom. Where do we position new content? Much gets inserted in old sections. But what about a new section that we want to remain open and current?

This section is really the endgame but it will unfold over, I anticipate, a couple of years before a new renaissance.

I have been following Dr. Taylor Marshall. He is a lay person highly educated in the doctrine, canon and history of the Roman Catholic Church into the present. He is on the front lines and reports back regularly to his constituents. I will open this section with his most recent video:

At this point, the Vatican is trying to shut down the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). The division this is causing has invigorated the part of the church who are practitioners of the TLM and their numbers are rapidly growing.

The Pope needs complete control over doctrine so he create a global ecuminical churchin which tradtional Christian precepts are marginalized. This dovetails with the communist agenda embodied by the Great Reset and the WEF with which the Pope is aligned. Expect ever more draconian measures by the papacy to try to eliminate all opposition, the same thing that is happening throughout all aspects of society.

References

  1. Pope’s New Encyclical to Praise Jihad Terror Supporter as Example of ‘Peace’ and ‘Fraternity’
  2. Nancy LeTourneau. Meet the Man Who Vets Trump’s Supreme Court Picks . Washington Monthly, September 21, 2020.
  3. Raul Diego. The Court of God: How a Catholic Secret Society Took Over SCOTUS. MPN News, September 28th, 2020.
  4. Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D. Pope Francis Calls for Giving United Nations Organization ‘Real Teeth’. Breitbart, Oct 4, 2020.
  5. John Letzing. Here’s the pope’s prescription for resetting the global economy in response to COVID-19. WEF, 09 Oct 2020.
  6. Lawrence A. Franklin. The Pope’s New Encyclical: A Surrender? Gatestone Institute, November 8, 2020.
  7. Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano. Open Letter to President Donald Trump. Catholic Family News, October 30, 20201.
  8. Thomas Reese. With 9 new electors, Pope Francis remakes the college of cardinals. RNS, October 25, 2020.
  9. Andrea Widburg. Pope Francis goes full communist. American Thinker, October 5, 2020.
  10. Dean Smith. Pope Francis pushes communism & one world government? OpeningWord.org, October 4, 2020.
  11. Cardinal Müller: Pope Francis is a Communist. Truth and Action.
  12. George Neumayr. Pope Francis’s Communist Mentor. The American Spectator, May 1, 2017.
  13. Mares C. Cardinal Turkson to Davos forum: Human dignity must not be compromised. CWR. January 29, 2021.
  14. The Secret in Three Parts: The Second Part. The Fatima Center.
  15. The Secret in Three Parts: The Third Part. The Fatima Center.
  16. Why World Enslavement or Not? The Fatima Center.
  17. Thompson JM. Pope Francis Calls For “New World Order” In A Post-Pandemic World. The Wine Press. March 15, 2021.

Encyclical Letters