VATICAN WANTS GLOBAL CENTRAL BANK
Color me surprised... NOT.
In this article shared by Ms. S.H., the Vatican recently sponsored a committee that called for (surprise surprise) a global central bank:
I definitely think this to be a colossally, hugely, unabashedly bad (and furthermore) stupid idea, but one certainly in line with what the Vatican, and Papacy, really are, based on claims much of the Christian world, and most of the secular humanistic world, regard as egregiously false, and those claims are tyrannical. There is no other word for them. There is no dressing them up, no explaining them away, and no softening of them, for that institution itself has not softened them nor rejected them.
Why is this a colossally, hugely, unabashedly bad and stupid idea?
Years ago, on one of many interviews with the late George Anne Hughes of The Byte show, and in conjunction with a prolonged series of interviews about my book Babylon's Banksters, I offered the opinion that eventually one would see the Vatican jump on the global government central bank bandwagon. My reasons were simple: throughout history, one has seen an alliance between the debt-money model, central banks, and religion... in short, an alliance between "money changers" and "the Temple," and it seems to me I remember a certain Someone having something to say about that a couple of millennia ago. (Apparently, that Someone and His supposedly infallible "Vicar" are now in a bit of ideological conflict.) In a private correspondence with a friend, I also predicted that inevitably one would see a move toward a European currency, or a global currency, backed by the "moral suasion" represented by religion. The trouble is, what religion makes such universal political and temporal claims?
Answer: the Papacy.
And it's been very clever in trying to distance itself not only from its own past, but from its own claims about itself. Recall that after the revolution of Vatican Two, Popes abandoned their sedan chairs and the papal tiara, the triple crown that symbolized and embodied the claims of the institution to have authority over the church triumphant (in heaven), the church suffering (in purgatory) and the church militant (on earth), each represented by one of the three crowns in the tiara. Pope Pius XII (Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli) was the last person to wear it, though Pope Paul VI was crowned with it, he seldom wore it in public functions. But amid all the flannel- and cotton-mouthed pronouncements of the Second Vatican Council, one central doctrine was treated in the old fashioned language: the papacy, and its claims, itself, and those pronouncements of Vatican Two stressed all the vocabulary of plenitudo potestatis that one was accustomed to from the mediaeval popes like Boniface VIII and Innocent III. It was, after all, Boniface VIII whose (aptly named) Bull, Unam Sanctam, stated clearly and unequivocally that it was necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff. Not in communion with, not adherent to other Catholic doctrine, but simply subject to the Papacy. And this itself was the subject of critique, not only by Eastern Orthodox theologians of the day (and since), but also of Roman Catholic theologians themselves: in the face of such supreme authority, what did the rest of Catholic doctrine really matter, if the sine qua non of being Catholic were mere submission to a claim of authority, whether or not that authority in other respects was even Catholic. The critique was leveled again by Roman Catholics, some even bishops, at the first Vatican Council that defined papal infallibility, and universal and immediate jurisdiction, in 1870-71.
The whole papal edifice and its claims have come again under scrutiny by Catholics dismayed by some of the current occupant of these claims' recent pronouncements, some of which don't sound all that "Catholic." Francis has called for his more traditionally-minded opponents to be "flexible and adaptable"; but when push comes to shove, invokes papal authority. The rest of Catholic tradition and doctrine are wholly subservient to it. And that means, effectively, all Catholic doctrine and practice are up for grabs.
In short, as the Orthodox Churches have stated clearly and unequivocally since these claims were pressed on it a millennium ago: such claims are no part of Catholic doctrine or practice, and lie at the heart of the West's schism from Orthodoxy ever since. The Protestants took up this renunciation of papal claims during the Reformation. It is the papacy, and its claims, that are at the heart of the disunity of Christendom, and that are at the heart of the issue.
So now the Vatican calls for a global central bank, and taxes on all financial transactions. And this is but another clue that the world of Boniface VIII is still alive and well, for one can assume that the Vatican wants its "cut of the action" in return for bartering away what remains of Catholic doctrine and tradition within that church in return for a seat - a central seat - at the table of Mr. Global. Some of the statements, when viewed against this backdrop of papal claims, are chilling:
It condemned what it called “the idolatry of the market” as well as a “neo-liberal thinking” that it said looked exclusively at technical solutions to economic problems.
“In fact, the crisis has revealed behaviors like selfishness, collective greed and hoarding of goods on a great scale,” it said, adding that world economics needed an “ethic of solidarity” among rich and poor nations.
“If no solutions are found to the various forms of injustice, the negative effects that will follow on the social, political and economic level will be destined to create a climate of growing hostility and even violence, and ultimately undermine the very foundations of democratic institutions, even the ones considered most solid,” it said.
It called for the establishment of “a supranational authority” with worldwide scope and “universal jurisdiction” to guide economic policies and decisions.
(Emphasis added)
And what "supranational authority" with "world wide scope" has such claims to "universal jurisdiction"?
Surprise, surprise, it's the papacy. And who would arbitrate "the various forms of injustice"? I suspect the reader knows the answer to that already.
So I don't know about you, but giving in here would be to undo the centuries of resistance, by both Orthodox, Protestants, and secular humanists, to the claims of this institution. And let's be clear here: that institution's own claims about itself are nothing less than tyranny, pure and simple.
Let's hope that Russia, and its Patriarch, and everyone else with a stake in a future of freedom, say a very firm nyet at this latest attempt to revive the Unam Sanctam of Boniface VIII, going now under the name of Francis I.
See you on the flip side...
23 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
Francis does not seem to have much to say that will help much… I thought he might explore Silvio Gesell’s work on The Natural Economic Order which was mostly written in Argentina a hundred years ago… but those who decide are not those we see, anymore than Obama had much to say about what the US would do in any respect, even in Cuba (did you notice how all the talk in the press about his responsibility for torture disappeared as soon as the Cuba news-coup overwhelmed the press? and yet, two years later or so, we still have to see the day when the embargo will be officially terminated…). Francis, no less than Obama et al, was –like Fidel Castro who lived to be 90 albeit the CIA’s supposed efforts– the servant of those who benefit from usury and who keep the Temple in the hands of the money changers… not simply lenders… Keynes said Gesell would someday be more famous than Marx, but at the rate we are going… not even the Virgin Mary coming out into the open has much of a chance to win…
Ok, I agree that the Vatican is inherently evil and corrupt and we need to use the last stone of the last temple as a tombstone to bury the last priest, then we can take our rightful place amoungst the stars and bring back the Cathars. (who essentially did exactly the same thing as Quetzecoatl, walked around preaching peace and being nice to each other..)
If we do head out into the stars and become a real spacefaring people.. Will country boundries be recognised? Do we pay ET in dollars or in Euros or in Yen?
Wont a one world currency actually help developement and unify people? (thinking of a reverse Babel moment..instead of dividing, unifying and bringing together.???) Actually thinking about it in LONG term results, we’ll actually have to become a NWO with a single currency once we get into Space. If there are other ET civilisations up there. It’ll be like Star Trek, but without the food replicateurs.. (I almost said “and teleportation.. “but we’re getting there..)
Kahlypso
https://ellenbrown.com/books/the-public-bank-solution/
http://publicbankinginstitute.org/
Above sites show how to use money as a tool/servant for all.
Currently, money is used to master mankind;
rather than act as his servant.
Kahlypso
My reply to your comment was sent to a holding cell.
probably due to sensitive word.
It’s actually part of web site address.
word: inste ‘t(y)ooSH(e)n.
If I remember correctly, “Star Trek” TOS held as a Federation standard that they would not deal with a particular planet until it was unified-enough to have ‘one voice’ speaking for the entire planet. It got ‘fuzzy’ when the Federation had to deal-with dictators and tyrants who were the ‘one voice’…
A likely offshoot of ‘one voice’ is a one world currency, either literally or defacto through fixed exchange rates. The Federation may be waiting until Earth has one currency. Of course, they face the same ‘problem’ with WHO controls that currency…
The financial sin problem is as old as human civilazation. Humananity must really be stupid since that old ursury problem is still not solved. Like the Bible is considered the oldest book, usury must be the one of the primary oldest unsolvable praktical problems.
Where is that “universal language” when you need it. Time travel to Leibnitz time must be intriguing to some.
I’m one that subscribes whole heartedly to serendipity. Just had lunch and we had fortune cookies. Mine read: It is by those who have suffered that the world is most advanced. One could say the Vatican manufactures/causes the suffering by an unheard of global industrial scale; and has thereby a real claim to such advancements.
Has the Vatican started giving out their coveted ethical solidarity certificates of authenticity with the appropriate water marks of papal smears?
The Money Changers and The Temple have been synonymous despite Christ having been crucified for daring to separate them.
There is always – in the realm of duality – going to be conflict between the forces of centralization and the forces of individuation. The pendulum will simply swing one way until the limitations of that particular stance become apparent. Then, the opposing stance will slowly become dominant in reaction. Ad infinitum…
There is another duality waiting in the wings. This is of the spiritual versus the temporal. (Note that ‘spiritual’ is only slightly related to the Papacy.) Right now, the temporal side is on a roll. Inevitably, the limitations of that side will also become evident. Then, we will see the spontaneous rise of the (true) spiritual side…
It is my estimation that centralization and temporalization have reached their zenith. Their limitations are becoming very apparent. Soon, we will see ‘corrections’ coming from the other side of those dualities…
David Icke has been stating for yrs. there has been a long-planned mov’t to subject all of humanity to a one-world gov’t and one world currency- and yet many still consider him to be a nut-case-
Jordan Maxwell has always stated all the woes of the world can be attributed to the Vatican-
the fact that the present pope has cannonized the FRAUD known as “Mother Teresa” is proof the Vatican is involved in money-laundering- more about that later-
I personally knew a German pediatrician who worked for Mother Teresa in the late 70’s- she said “never again” because the MSM portrayed her as being the opposite of who she really was: according to my source she was nothing more than a media-horny, self-serving b***ch who never lifted a finger/did no work whatsoever but ordered everyone else around, treated her staff with no respect whatsoever but whenever she requested “donations” managed to always jockey herself into the right media position; her jockeying herself for benefit of the media actually hampered work in her hospital (according to Renate, my source)-
in the meantime thanks to VatiLeaks (most info now deleted) the reason why there was so little money flowing into Mother Teresa’s hospital is because most of the donated funds were flowing into her own personal bank accounts (any wonder why she was often photographed with Haitian dictator Baby Doc Duvalier?- the Haitian national bank is most probably connected to the Vatican bank)-
it’s a long, ugly story-
Larry in Germany
i
t
I’ve heard and read similar stories. I’m always suspicious when corporate fascist press speaks lovingly of someone. Just look at the Nobel Peace Prize. It’s apparently given to those who help the $ales figures of dynamite go….
Sky F***ing High!
I’ve got a great idea, why doesn’t the Vatican merge with CNN. Well what you would get is an organization making up the lies, and another using their worldwide audience to spread them………..GEEZUZZZ !!!!
The Vatican lost all credibility long ago, the moral contradiction issues wont go away and people are walking away from it. As far as a world central bank, that’s going to happen when hell freezes over (sorry about the pun). Just like David Rockafelon’s new world order, IT AINT GUNNA HAPPEN. So Mr. Vatican, take your grand idea’s and shove them where the sun doesn’t shine !!!!!!!
One of the problems is the Papacy is not and has never had the capacity to run and administer a planetary society. It’s disruption of the Holy Roman Empire and it’s part in the dismantling of Italy and preventing the unification of Germany. Its civil war with Orthodox Christianity should have taught it to remain out of secular politics it can criticize but in the end that it has to abide by the government decisions.
What’s stopping the Vatican from using it’s vast hoards from opening up branches of banks all over the world giving credit to the needy? As long as banks lose the too big to fail status and are allowed to go bust when they make bad decisions it shouldn’t matter. No more tax payer bailouts of the financial rip off schemes of said tax payers. Just say no to banks unless it’s an absolute emergency. Now I would like to see more Sharia compliant banks compete globally with usuary rip off banks of the west. Sharia banks buy the house or auto and resale the item to the borrow at a slightly higher price and with payments. So a 100,000 dollar house will cost the borrower 110,000 dollars by the time it is paid off instead of 300,000 to 400,000 dollars under an usuary loan. Talking about ripping off the poor! If Middle east type banks went global western banks would quickly go the way as the dodo bird as they rightfully should.
In Rockefeller religion kampe ‘tiSH(e)n is the #1 sin.
But, without their usury interest and/or compound interest there would be pure hell to pay. Sharia Banking was/is/will be crucified at every opportunity. If the Crusades didn’t mow them down; then they do it all over again. Nothing like an evil[even] playing field, freshly mowed clean of any religion that is actually spiritual in practice.
The Muslim world would get more willing converts as well if they carried out Jihad by spreading Sharia Banks globally rather than violence . If the Vatican/Rothschild usury banks martyrd the Sharia Bankers then even more Sharia Bankers should spring up to take their place. The whole world would back their Jihad as well once they got a taste of the wealth and prosperity a moral and biblical banking system brings. Even the Bible warns against usury interest financial warfare schemes that deliver whole nations and all their wealth to the perpetrators of such enterprises.
“Abdolute power demoralizes its possessor. To that all history bears witness. And if it be a spiritual power which rules men’s consciences, the danger is only so much greater, for the possession of such a power exercises a specially treacherous fascination, while it is peculiarly conducive to self-deceit, because the lust of dominion, when it has become a passion, is only too easily in this case excused under the plea of zeal for the salvation of others.” — Professor J.H. von Dullinger — who was subsequently excommunicated from the Roman Catholic church (1871)
The swamp is global.
(By its very nature.)
Based on the RAThschild’s Economist Mag 1988 Cover Predicting A “One World Currency in 2018,” and based on the current International Movement to Use A New Gold Backed Trade Note and Based on The Fact That The Vatican Has Tons of Gold and That They Can Conspire with RAThschild himself, It Seems To Me That It Would Make Sense That RAT and The Papacy Working Together Would Have A Good Shot at Pulling Off Something As NWO Nefarious As This Would Be
Babylon’s Banksters up to their old tricks…. but today more and more people are seeing through their game.
In the meantime, today’s Italian press is full of reports of the arrest for “cyber espionage” of a gentleman belonging to a very curious profession: that of Quantum Economist.
Link to text:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20111024_nota_en.html
PS this 2011 document was issued under Ratzinger.
Thanks for the link to the original Vatican document Dana, which is not provided in this article, which is also undated and unsourced. Yes, this story dates from Oct. 2011 and is a present verbatim regurgitation from yournewswire dot com which copied the 10/24/11 Reuters report titled ‘UPDATE 2-Vatican urges economic reforms, condemns collective greed’ Private bank, secret accounts, no public accountability? . . . a colossally bad idea as Dr. Farrell argues.