POPE FRANCIS ORDERS ALL VATICAN INSTITUTIONS TO USE VATICAN BANK
This story was seen and shared by so many of you that it vaulted right into the "finals" folder in this week's emails, as virtually everyone from Catherine Austin Fitts, to Dr. Mark Skidmore and almost all of you who are regular readers here, and who regularly send me articles sent this one.
And I have to admit, this one has me deeply concerned. But before we get to that, first, the story itself, in what I consider its most interesting version:
Now before we get to the article and my deep concerns, one mistaken impression that some who saw this story and passed it along, and who seem to have had needs to be cleared up, and that is, the pope has not ordered all the liquid assets of the entire Roman Catholic Church to be concentrated in the IOR, or Vatican Bank. Your local parish will continue to be under the "corporation sole" (in western countries) of the local diocesan ordinary, and for those who do not speak "ecclesiasticese", an "ordinary" is simply the local diocesan bishop who possesses the final administrative authority for that diocese and who exercises the CEO function for the corporation sole.
Thus, the Pope has not plundered the entire church to concentrate all its wealth in Rome, so relax everyone.
With that in mind, we come to my deep concerns, for the Pope has ordered all Roman Catholic institutions with a direct connection to the See of Rome, that is, to the Papacy itself, to bank its liquid assets solely and exclusively with the Vatican Bank. In effect, this means that all orders of monks and nuns must bank there, as well as all the administrative departments of the Vatican itself. Note the following from the article:
According to Francis’ rescript, financial and liquid assets held in banks other than the IOR must be moved to the Vatican bank within 30 days of Sept. 1, 2022.
The decree will force Holy See institutions, including the Secretariat of State, to move their financial assets to the IOR by the end of September. The Secretariat of State is known to have had accounts in Swiss financial institutions, including Credit Suisse, through which the controversial London building investment was initially carried out. (Emphasis added)
It was these two statements from the article that led to my "deep concerns," because these two statements lead me to believe we are not dealing with something that can be interpreted along normal merely economic or financial lines. I believe the only correct way to interpret this is an administrative, cultural, and if one prefer, symbolic sign of the struggle between traditionalists and modernists that has been rocking the papal church since the much bally-hooed Vatican II, and - let's be honest - its failure to bring renewal to that church.
If you're familiar with that struggle, you'll know that the Secretariat of State was the focus of the modernists' attention, beginning with Giovanni Cardinal Cicognani under John XXIII, and the controversial Jean Cardinal Villot (who, you might recall, was also Cardinal Camerlengo and who allegedly "cleaned up" the apartment of Pope John-Paul I when the latter was found dead only a month into his pontificate), to John-Paul II's Agostino Cardinal Casaroli. In short, in the thinking and feeling of many Roman Catholic traditionalists, the Secretariat of State has been a locus of the modernism they feel is infecting and destroying their church, and books such as Fr. Charles Murr's Murder in the 33rd Degree: The Gagnon Investigation into Vatican Freemasonry have not helped to put out the fires: (See
Add to this that the Secretariat of State has also been the locus of some of the financial shady dealings associated with the Vatican, and one can surmise why Francis - no traditionalist by any stretch of the imagination - might be succumbing to pressures... the question is, pressures from whom? The traditionalists, or the modernists?
As of now, a case could be made for either: concentration of the liquid assets of the departments (dicasteries) of the Vatican, and of religious orders, would give a quick and accurate picture of what they are all "up to," and would allow any quiet traditionalist, or further modernist, reform an accurate picture of what needed to be done, and where and how to advance their goals. But for the modernists who have controlled the papal church since Vatican II at least (if not quietly longer than that), it also does something else: it throws the "cone of silence and invisibility" over their maneuverings. Time will tell which may be going on...
... but I'm not betting on the traditionalists...
See you on the flip side...
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.