Paganism Has Taken Over The Vatican

The conservative Catholic looks up to the highest echelons of the Papacy’s power, and tries to grabs whatever straws of hope he can grab from the winds of confusion that blow from the rigid and moribund plateau that they call the Church. The Rock that was once St. Peter has been cast off, and the the stone which the builders refused (Psalm 118:22) is today refused. The gates of Hell has always been exerting its efforts to overthrow the good, and now in our current time, it appears that the light of the world is but a small glimmer surrounded by waves of darkness. What void are we entering? What chasm will engulf us? The return to the fertility gods of blood is transpiring; the sanguinary rites of the abyss, the bloodlust, the insatiable thirst of tribalist rage — a recourse to the nightmare of antiquity will manifest upon the gaze of modern eyes.

The Amazonian Synod in Rome has been presented as a call for nature preservation and the rights of indigenous peoples in the Amazon. But this is just a front to disguise an agenda of paganism that the powers who control the Vatican want to advance. On October the 4th, 2019, an Amazonian woman led a pagan ritual in the Vatican. She was wearing the traditional feather headdress, and bowed before a tree and two statues of naked pregnant women. The female shaman also waved a rattle in the typical movement of indigenous shamanism. And there were the cardinals, standing around as though nothing wrong was happening. Canon lawyer Fr. Gerald Murray of the New York archdiocese rightly called the procession pagan:

“The ceremony can be accurately described as a pagan religious ceremony and that false goddess, Pachamama — who is like a creation god — this is horrendous, I have to say, no matter what the intention of those who invited those people there. It’s quite clear that that was a pagan religious ceremony with religious meaning to them. This should not be — ever occur in a Catholic institution, certainly not in the Holy See. … “Paganism is not here in the Earth to teach Catholicism. It’s the other way around. Catholicism is meant to overthrow pagan false notions.”

How this pagan ceremony was organized is not completely known, at least not in the public eye. This is what Robert Royal of The Catholic Thing observed:

“Something unique, something that we’ve never seen before on the Vatican grounds took place. … No one has been able to interpret it. No one wants to take responsibility for how it was organized or who permitted it and why the pope was there and what it meant for him to be a witness as this was going on.”

Royal also observed that the ritual brought:

“…tremendous confusion, especially after many people before the synod even started were pointing out the dangers of this kind of syncretism[.]”

He also stated that it brought in “native elements that don’t really accord well with Catholicism,” that are “confusing and lead us down strange paths … I think that the fact that no one can explain this is an additional problem, besides the fact that something that is not Christianity was celebrated on the grounds of the Vatican itself.” 

Pope Francis also did not read the prepared speech he was suppose to give and  simply said an Our Father before leaving. It appears that this was an expressing of outrage on the Pope’s part. One indigenous leader, Jonas Marcolino Macuxí, who was once Catholic but is now Evangelical, called the ritual completely pagan, saying:

“It’s 100 percent pagan … My main concern is to unite people: Brazilians, whites, Indians, people from the rest of the world because the visions are being exploited, they’re being promoted and these can only lead to a major breakdown of society that we have to avoid in order for everyone to progress — Indians, whites, et cetera — and have a decent life and freedom.”

Rexcrisanto Delson, in an interview with Life Site News, stated:

“I saw the ceremony that was performed in the Vatican garden and couldn’t believe my eyes … I later learned that an Amazon tribal leader confirmed it was purely pagan. Did the Catholics who participated and supported such a vile act not know it was pagan? … There’s no excuse from here on out to claim they didn’t know they were violating the First Commandment”

One of the major voices behind the Synod is Fr. Justino Sarmento Rezende, a Brazilian priest who is a fanatic pusher for a syncretism between Catholicism and paganism. He has ardently advanced that the Catholic Church needs to have an “indigenous face” and embrace all of the indigenous cultures of the Amazon rainforest (this really is a form of racial identitarianism). Rezende’s involvement in the Synod is evinced by the fact that he attended the private pre-Synod “study meeting” in Rome in June of 2018.

Rezende said that in his diocese of Sao Gabriel, there is a movement that “works with the theme of self-determination, the strengthening of languages, cultures, the revitalization of these traditions.” He also said that in the Upper Rio Negro region there are “people with academic training … many indigenous organizations, young people, women, leaders, shamans.” He called this a sign of “vitality” and “dynamism.” Here we see two things being promoted.

There is racial identitarian, hence why he speaks of “self-determination” and a priority for “languages” and “cultures”. Secondly, we see paganism. Hence a praise for “shamans.” If this sort of language could be officiated as acceptable by the Catholic Church, then easily European identitarians who claim Catholicism could use Church synod doctrine to elevate their own self-determination and their cultures and languages all for an ethno-nationalist cause. From indigenous identitarianism, racialists in a traditionally Catholic country like Austria could as easily then promote a White Euro focused identitarianism. Martin Sellner, a leader of the Identitarian movement in Austria who claims traditional Catholicism, believes that he is taking part in a struggle for the continuation of European culture, and in this he is completely in favor for elevating European pagan images like Thor’s Hammer:

“We say that we fight against the enemies of all European cultural and religious traditions. This is why radical neopagans wearing Thor’s hammer, for example, stand hand in hand with staunch Catholic and Orthodox Christians during our summer camp in France. They have a mutual respect for each other’s religiosity. Even representatives from such novel movements such as the “solar Christians” (fr. chretiens solairs) appeared among the French identitarians. They are baptized Christians, faithful children of the Church, yet they are not opposed to celebrating pagan seasonal holidays as part of their North-European cultural heritage.”

What the Identitarians of Europe are doing with Catholicism, the Indigenous identitarians are doing in South America.       

To understand the sinister nature of this Synod, one must peruse the “preparatory document” for the Synod entitled, Amazonia: New Paths for the Church and for an Integral Ecology.

The pushing for paganism in the preparatory document for the Amazon synod is quite obvious.  For example, the document talks about how the sacrament of Baptism can be converged with the pagan worship of the Amazon River. In one part it reads of how Baptism is a celebration of “water” and then it shifts to how this could be connected with “the water-related rites” of native peoples of the Amazon:

“the celebration of Baptism invites us to consider the importance of “water” as a source of life, not only as a tool or material resource, and it makes the community of believers responsible for guarding this element as a gift of God for the whole planet. Furthermore, since the water of Baptism purifies the baptized of all sins, its celebration allows the Christian community to adopt the value of water and “the river” as a source of purification, thus facilitating the inculturation of the water-related rites that come from the ancient wisdom of the Amazonian peoples.”

All under the face of inclusiveness, what this Synod is conspiring for is a shift in favor towards heathenism. Baptism no longer signifies what it is intended for, but is forced to be integrated into the pagan worship of the Amazon River. The preparatory document wants to also change our view of Catholic martyrdom. Instead of a saint dying for the cause of Christ, the environmentalist activist who dies for his own cause is now seen as a martyr whose blood is joined with the blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Mass. It reads that the Eucharist is “an act of cosmic love, in which human beings, together with the incarnate Son of God and all creation, give thanks to God for new life in the risen Christ”. And then it goes on to say:

“At the same time, the blood of so many men and women that has been shed – bathing the Amazonian lands for the good of its inhabitants and of the territory – is joined to the Blood of Christ, which was poured out for all and for all creation.”

To advance an image of the martyr, is to advance a religion; to change how we see martyrdom, is to change the religion itself. The roots of the Church are watered by the blood of martyrs. What a martyr dies for is the religion that he strived to advance, and so to change how we perceive a martyr is to alter our view of the religion. If we see a saint who dies because he refuses to deny Christ as a martyr, then his zeal becomes worthy of imitation. But, if someone who is fighting for the environment (for the good “of the territory” to reference the document) then becomes perceived as a martyr in a Catholic paradigm, then our view of Catholicism shifts towards a more environmentalist pagan religion. If the religion exonerates someone for dying for the good “of the territory,” then the religion is centered around the territory. What we then have here is a martyrdom ideology centered around the territory, and it becomes a sort of identitarian nationalism that centers around the land and a pantheistic religion.   

As a key person behind the document, Rezende emphasizes that the Church needs to incorporate a “mestizo face,” and implies that the Church needs to somehow “grow” in her spiritual understanding by incorporating the pagan elements of the cultures of Catholic peoples. He stated emphatically that what is needed is “a church with a ‘caboclo’ [mestizo] face”. Could a European nationalist then say that there needs to be more emphasis on the ‘European face’ of the Church? 

What is most problematic is that we have a direct link between this pagan conspiracy and the Vatican itself. The organization that has acted as the key advisor for the Amazon Synod is REPAM (Red Eclesial Pan-Amazónica, or the Pan-Amazonian Church Network), an organization founded by the Vatican’s Caritas and backed by the Latin American Bishops’ Conference (CELAM). On the official website of REPAM, open paganism is described and praised as something good and beneficial. In a post from November of 2017, it talks about a conference called the Integral Ecology Meeting, held in Quito, that was made by the organization and was led by REPAM’s leader, Mauricio Lopez Oropeza, who was in the private pre-Synod conference in June of 2018. In the post it reads:

“On the second day of the Integral Ecology Meeting, it began with an indigenous ceremony coordinated by a group of representatives of diverse native peoples, from Brazil, Ecuador, Panama, Guatemala and Mexico. A spiritual experience of contact with Mother Nature and with the gods and spirits of our peoples.” (Translated from Spanish)

Notice the last words: “the gods and spirits of our peoples.” I emphasize on the last two words because they denote a spirit of tribalism that is essential for any true racialist ideology, which is the rejection of Christianity and the adulation of the native gods because they are local to the land and not foreign.   

The promotion of paganism and for having a certain ethnic face for religious devotion is within the paradigm of identitarianism. Part of the upcoming Amazon Synod is a project backed by the Vatican’s REPAM and that is for the preservation of the Kukama language and for the perpetuation of their ancestral creation stories. The project entails young girls singing songs about their tribal beliefs and culture, and is being conducted by Radio Ucamara de Nauta for, in the words of REPAM, “the defense of their cultural identity.” Again, identitarianism.  Marbelí Salas Arirama, one of the girls involved, said this about the project:

“It has been a very good experience, to feel that we can be leaders to spread the value of our culture and our roots”

Jeidith Díaz Murayari, another participant, spoke similarly:

“it doesn’t matter if it was us or others who had sung, the important thing is that there are many of us who are discovering the treasure we have with our language and our culture. ”

REPAM’s report on the project states that the project transmits “inseparable union with nature from spirituality” and “contributes to the leadership of young people and the strengthening of the identity of our peoples in the Amazon.” With such rhetoric, why could’t Catholic identitarians speak about native White identity in Europe? This is not far-fetched at all. Cardinal Robert Sarah recently said that “everyone was created by God to be placed in a specific place, with its culture, traditions, and history,” a logic that can be easily used to justify ethno-nationalism. And he said this in the context of immigration to Europe. So then, it would not be surprising to see European identitarians, with a Catholic twist, saying that immigration is ruining the local White identity. 

On March 29th of 2019, there was a conference at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. which was co-sponsored by REPAM and which was organized to prepare for the upcoming Amazon Synod. Present in the conference was José Gregorio Díaz Mirabal, the president of the Coalition of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin (COICA). COICA has been collaborating with the Vatican’s REPAM office.

The head of REPAM, Mauricio Lopez, said that it was from COICA that “a strong call was made for the Church to commit, to overcome ancient distances, limitations, errors, to be able to join with the peoples, being that they are the most important guardians and an option where they believe in the Church, believe that she can accompany her, believe that she is a true ally on this path, and invite her to walk along with them.” This is essentially saying that COICA was instrumental behind the idea of the Amazon Synod. COICA’s president, Mirabal, wrote a report which was published on REPAM’s website in August of 2018, in which he talks about having ties with a pagan environmentalist organization called the Gaia Foundation (named after the Greek goddess, Gaia):

“Finally, we have proposals for the practice of full life that we are socializing in different spaces such as the Sacred Basins project from the wisdom of the Indigenous Peoples and nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon, the Amazon Corridor, Andes and Atlantic from the intercultural vision with the GAIA Foundation, the Green Carpet from the waters of the Colombian Guaviare and its indigenous and intercultural artists that mark our journey towards the global socialization of our diversity of thought, our way of seeing and preserving life.”

The fact that they choose a European goddess, Gaia, is very telling of the plans, since it means that a European paganism can as well apply to the ideology of the pagans behind the Synod. One of the advisors for the Gaia Foundation is Lara Lutzenberger. She promotes an ideology that could fit perfectly well with the Identitarian paradigm: she speaks of ‘sacred space’ and the worship of the ancestors who lived in the sacred space and how these are the roots of a tribal identity in nature. In one article that she wrote entitled, Truly Sacred Sites, Lara says:

“Incidentally the notion of ancestry also differs between our perception and the indigenous one. While we are at grandparent level … they go back and worship so many generations ago that they spend days and days and more days rescuing, without pause, their stories in community rounds. But, returning to the sacred site, it confers the identity and league of a people.”

With such a fixation on land, ancestors and gods, how is this different from the Nazi obsession with lebensraum (“living space” for Germans), blood and soil? Truly, how is this different from the racial ideology that worships the ‘gods of our ancestors’ as a way to express a regionalist, tribalist and nationalist sentiment? There really is no difference. This is where the true danger lies with the what the Synod is bringing: an emphasis on native identity and thus native paganism, could be applied to all racialism, including that of the Europeans. This Amazon Synod is a pandora’s box.

In 2017, there was an initiative in Vatican City between the Vatican’s REPAM, the Gaia Amazonas Foundation (a pagan environmentalist organization with a Catholic face which has ties with the Gaia Foundation) and several other organizations to discuss water preservation.

The Gaia Amazonas Foundation was founded by Martin von Hildebrand (grandson of the famous Catholic theologian, Dietrich von Hildebrand) who sits on the advisory board for the Interfaith Rainforest Initiative (IRI) which, according to the official website of Gaia Amazonas, contains “representatives of the Episcopal, Anglican, Presbyterian, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Hare Krishna, Buddhist, Taoist, Evangelic and Orthodox Greek religions”.

In the late 1980s, Hildebrand founded COAMA, an organization created to protect the Amazon rainforest. While Hildebrand was the head of COAMA, the project was actually launched by the Gaia Foundation. The pagan agenda of the Gaia Foundation is very obvious when one searches through the group’s website. The Gaia Foundation has as one of its advisors environmentalist pagan, Stephan Harding, one of the pioneers behind the Gaia Theory, or the idea that the earth is one “self-regulating” system or a single, evolving intelligence. Why do they call this the “Gaia theory”? Because, ultimately, the belief, overlapped with scientific terms, has an entire pagan ideological goal. In an interview that the Gaia Foundation conducted in December of 2018, Harding openly promoted the worship of Gaia and admitted to the pagan ideology of the idea. When he was asked if the Gaia Theory was “just a theory?” Harding replied:

“No. The important difference between a scientific and a mythological view here, is that we must really feel that Gaia is alive- a great mysterious, animate being. We must understand that Gaia has purpose and that all the evolution that has happened up to this point is about something. That it is not just chance or blind natural selection, but that there is something deeply teleological, meaningful and purposeful about what is happening on the Earth and that human consciousness is an essential part of that story. To develop a Gaian consciousness is to align oneself with the deep, mysterious intention that the Earth herself is manifesting.

…

Different peoples have used different words for this being. One of the most famous words from South America is Pachamama, which is the same archetypal image of a living mother goddess, that in the West we call Gaia. For the ancient Greeks, Gaia was the Mother Goddess, Mother of All. She is the soul of the world rolled into the earthly sphere of our planet.

Gaia represents the energy that brings forth life and takes life back. From an indigenous point of view, She has incredible intelligence, consciousness and is full of intention. She can be fierce to those who disobey her rules and kind to those who obey her. Death and destruction are part of her creative process.”

Gaia and the mother goddess of the indigenous pagans of the Amazon, these are all to be worshipped and revered in the religious paradigm of the environmentalist gurus like Harding. The Social Darwinism of this religion is most conspicuous. In this religion, it is not a belief in a kind mother goddess to whom gentle indigenous people give their adoration. In the Gaia Theory that is pushed for here, the goddess is evolving; thus, since evolution is within the very being of Gaia, the ideology of “Survival of the Fittest” — the creed of Darwinism — must apply. In killing, in extermination, in wars, famine and disease, Gaia is merely ‘evolving.’ She is advancing through the strong overtaking and annihilating the weak, removing their ‘inferior’ genetics for the progress of superior genetic makeups. Hence why Harding specifically says in the Gaia Foundation interview that within this “Gaian consciousness” “Death and destruction are part of her creative process.”

This is about genocide. 

Why would a Catholic, Martin von Hildebrand, be collaborating with such an organization? What we are seeing is a pagan conspiracy.

The Gaia Theory was developed by the British environmentalist James Lovelock. Within the ideological framework of Lovelock’s Gaia philosophy is a belief that humans will eventually be replaced, through evolution, by a race of cyborgs or beings created through a mergence with artificial intelligence (AI).

Humans, in Lovelock’s language, are the current day “knowers” or “understanders” of the world, but will be replaced by new understanders. Lovelock wrote a book the title of which denotes the Darwinist agenda of the entire Gaia cult. The title is Novacene: The Coming Age of Hyperintelligence. In one page it reads:

“The revolution that has just begun may be understood as a continuation of the process whereby the Earth nurtures the understanders, the beings that will lead the cosmos to self-knowledge. What is revolutionary about this moment is that the understanders of the future will not be humans but what I choose to call ‘cyborgs’ that will have designed and built themselves from the artificial intelligence systems we have already constructed. These will soon become thousands then millions of times more intelligent than us. The term ‘cyborg’ was coined by Manfred Clynes and Nathan Kline in 1960. It refers to a cybernetic organism: an organism as self-sufficient as one of us but made of engineered materials. I like this word and definition because it could apply to anything ranging in size from a micro-organism to a pachyderm, from a microchip to an omnibus. It is now commonly taken to mean an entity that is part flesh, part machine. I use it here to emphasize that the new intelligent beings will have arisen, like us, from Darwinian evolution.” (p. 29)

These new beings of transhumanism will come about from Darwinian evolution and replace humanity, which means that it will come about from the violent process of ‘survival of the fittest,’ according to this fantasy. Now, will there ever be a new intelligent being — made from a merging between man and machine — that will eclipse humanity? No. What the transhumanists and Gaia acolytes are promoting is a fantasy. But, the fantasy is not unto itself dangerous, rather it is the ones who actually believe that they can make their fantasy into a reality that are the real bringers of destruction.

The ideologues of the French Revolution believed that they could usher in a utopia of complete and utter equality. But while this was a chimera, they nonetheless believed that it could become a reality if only they killed those who impeded their fantasy from materializing. Their fantasy never came about, but what was real were the hundreds of thousands being slaughtered in the Reign of Terror. Be it the ideas of National Socialism, Marxism and the like, what they envisioned as utopia was really fantasy, but the blood they spilt for that fantasy —the mountains of corpses, the genocides, the mass executions, the gulags, the killing fields, the human experimentations — was disturbingly real. The sinister core of transhumanism is that it declares Darwinian evolution as the process of the creation of their new overlords of the earth.

The Nazis had their “overman” or the superior race that they believed would dominate the earth in a bloody Darwinian struggle; and today, it is the transhumanists who believe in the creation of a superhuman in a system of Darwinian evolution. The principle of these ideas are the same, the only thing that changes are the terms, and their denouement is reflected in the dialogue of the wicked as is described by the Wisdom of Solomon:

“Let us oppress the righteous poor;

let us neither spare the widow

nor revere the aged for hair grown white with time.

But let our strength be our norm of righteousness;

for weakness proves itself useless.” (Wisdom 2:10-11)

In the private pre-Synod meeting in Rome, there was a German Catholic Cardinal named Christoph Schonborn who has been very favorable towards Sodom. For example, Schonborn argues that sodomites who are in monogamous relationships are doing better than sodomites who are promiscuous, as if Sodom can somehow be better. No matter the context or the situation, Sodom is always evil and always worthy of destruction. Schonborn, on the other hand, thinks that sodomite “marriage” is “touching” because it involves men desiring matrimony. In an interview with Stern the cardinal said:

“Personally, I find it touching that in a time when marriage is losing its radiance, same-sex and living couples desire that ultimate form of partnership.”   

Schonborn has also said that sodomite unions deserve “respect” as long as they are not labeled as a marriage:

“There can be same-sex partnerships and they need respect, and even civil law protection. Yes, but please keep it away from the notion of marriage”

This way of talking is one of the most frequently used forms of deception. It essentially says, ‘Sodom is fine, as long as it doesn’t use the term marriage.’ The evil that is being seen is Sodom, but the priests of Sodom will say the sodomites are great people, as long as they don’t call the evil they do ‘marriage.’ It allows for the tolerance of Sodom while masquerading itself as orthodox by saying that it is for marriage. It is a deceptive way to bypass the law against Sodom while securing Sodom for toleration.

This is why we must war against this form of argumentation. The evil must be pursued and destroyed, and no argument that somehow finds exceptions for the evil should be accepted. But, sadly, this is not the case, and such sophistry abounds to the acceptation of the masses. The fact that a cardinal like Schonborn is involved in this Synod is an indication as to its true purpose: paganism and homosexuality. In this diabolical framework — in which paganism and homosexuality are championed — eugenics and Darwinism inevitably creeps its head up. We see this already in the fact that the Vatican’s Amazon office, REPAM, has ties to the Gaia Foundation which advocates for the Gaia Theory, the formulator of which, John Lovelock, is a eugenist who believes in the creation of a super race of cyborgs who will take over the world.

The pagan kingdom of Sodom is working to eclipse the light of divine law.  

  

           

Source