In the book titled, Hitler’s Pope, the author John Cornwell starts the story of the future pope who reigned when Hitler ruled Germany, with his grandfather and Pope Pius IX, who were driven out of the City of Rome. When Pius IX fled from the city of Rome, disguised as a nun, the only man he took with him was the future pope’s grandfather. Cornwall addresses the close relationship of the two men, and thereafter identifies how the future pope’s father also was connected with the power center of the Catholic Church. In doing so he identifies the social, political and religious environment of the history from the time of Pius IX, through World War II. The overview of history is tremendously informative.
Pe aranduka hérava *Hitler’s Pope*, haihára John Cornwell omoñepyrũ pe tembiasakue pe pápa oútava rehe, ha’éva pe oisãmbyhyva’ekue Hitler oisãmbyhy aja Alemania, imarãangatu guasu ha Papa Pío IX reheve, ojeityva’ekue Roma Távagui. Pío IX okañy ramo Roma távagui, peteĩ kuña marã’ỹva ramo oñemondéva, pe kuimba’e añoite ogueraháva’ekue hendive ha’eva’ekue pe pápa oútava ramói. Cornwell oñe’ẽ mokõi kuimba’e joajuetévare, ha upéi ohechauka mba’éichapa pe pápa oútava ru avei ojoajuva’ekue pe Iglesia Católica pokatu mbytépe. Péicha ojapóvo, ha’e ohechauka pe tekove atyguasu, politika ha jerovia rehegua tekoha oĩva pe tembiasakue ryepýpe, Pío IX ára guive, Mokõiha Ñorairõ Guasu peve. Pe tembiasakue jehechapyre tuichaiterei mba’eporã oikuaaukáva.
“Another step in papal assumption was taken, when, in the eleventh century, Pope Gregory VII proclaimed the perfection of the Roman Church. Among the propositions which he put forth was one declaring that the church had never erred, nor would it ever err, according to the Scriptures. But the Scripture proofs did not accompany the assertion. The proud pontiff also claimed the power to depose emperors, and declared that no sentence which he pronounced could be reversed by anyone, but that it was his prerogative to reverse the decisions of all others.
“Ambue jepe papapy rembipota guasu rehegua ojepysove, ary XI-pe, Papa Gregorio VII omomarandu jave Tupao Romagua oguerekoha perfección. Umi ñe’ẽme’ẽ ha’e oguenohẽ vaekue apytépe oĩ peteĩ he’íva tupao araka’eve ndojejavyi hague, ha araka’eve ndojejavyimo’ãiha, Ñandejára Ñe’ẽ he’iháicha. Hákatu umi ñe’ẽme’ẽ Escritúragui oguerovia hag̃ua nde’ive ndohói hendive upe je’e. Pe pontífice oñemomba’eguasúva avei he’i oguerekoha pokatu omboguejy hag̃ua mburuvichakuéra guasu, ha omombe’u avave ndaikatuiha omoambue ni omboyke peteĩ sentencia ha’e he’íva; ha katu ha’e voi oguerekoha tekojojaite opa ambuekuéra remimoĩmby jey hag̃ua.”
“A striking illustration of the tyrannical character of this advocate of infallibility was given in his treatment of the German emperor, Henry IV. For presuming to disregard the pope’s authority, this monarch was declared to be excommunicated and dethroned. Terrified by the desertion and threats of his own princes, who were encouraged in rebellion against him by the papal mandate, Henry felt the necessity of making his peace with Rome. In company with his wife and a faithful servant he crossed the Alps in midwinter, that he might humble himself before the pope. Upon reaching the castle whither Gregory had withdrawn, he was conducted, without his guards, into an outer court, and there, in the severe cold of winter, with uncovered head and naked feet, and in a miserable dress, he awaited the pope’s permission to come into his presence. Not until he had continued three days fasting and making confession, did the pontiff condescend to grant him pardon. Even then it was only upon condition that the emperor should await the sanction of the pope before resuming the insignia or exercising the power of royalty. And Gregory, elated with his triumph, boasted that it was his duty to pull down the pride of kings.” The Great Controversy, 57.
“Peteĩ techapyrã ipyahúva ko defensor infalibilidad rehegua rekotee mbaretepochy rehegua ojehechauka vaʼekue pe tratamiénto omeʼẽ vaʼekuépe mburuvicha guasu Alemánipegua, Enrique IV-pe. Oñembotavýgui omboyke hag̃ua pe pápape pokatu, ko mburuvicha guasu oñeikuaauka oñemosẽha tupãóguio ha oñemboguejýha iguapyhágui. Okyhyjégui umi iprínsipe tee oheja hag̃uáicha chupe ha umi ñeʼẽmondýi rehe, ojemokyreʼỹ vaʼekue oñepuʼã hag̃ua hese pe mandato papal rupive, Enrique ohechakuaa tekotevẽha oñemoĩ porã jey hag̃ua Róma ndive. Oho ijarýi ha peteĩ tembiguái jeroviapy reheve, okrusa umi Alpes mbyte roʼy asýpe, ikatu hag̃uáicha oñemomirĩ pe pápa renondépe. Oguahẽvo pe kastíllo-pe, upépe Gregorio oñemokañy hague, ogueraha chupe, iñangarekoháraʼỹre, peteĩ korapy okapeguápe, ha upépe, pe roʼy hatãetéva araroʼýpe, iñakã opíre ha ipy nandi, ha ao vai reheve, ohaʼarõ pe pápa omeʼẽ hag̃ua chupe permiso oike hag̃ua hendápe. Ndahaʼéi mbohapy ára ajerure ha ojepyʼamongeta rire añoite pe pontífice oñemomichĩ omeʼẽ hag̃ua chupe perdón. Jepe upéicharõ, upéva ojeapo peteĩ condición rupínte: pe mburuvicha guasu tohaʼarõ pe pápa ñemoneĩ mboyve oguerujey hag̃ua umi techaukaha térã oiporu hag̃ua mburuvicha guasu pokatu. Ha Gregorio, ovyʼaitereíva itriumfo rehe, oñemombaʼeguasu heʼívo haʼeha hembiapo omboguejy hag̃ua mburuvichakuéra ñembotuicha.” The Great Controversy, 57.
Gregory VII was an “advocate of infallibility,” but the ridiculous claim was not made an official doctrine (dogma), until Pius IX, who made the foolish claim an established doctrine at the first Vatican Council. The doctrine was passed July 18, 1870, one hundred and fifty years to the day before the first disappointment of the one hundred and forty-four thousand.
Gregorio VII ha’e va’ekue peteĩ “oipytyvõva infalibilidad-pe”, ha pe ñembo’e rei pukavy ndaikatúi oñemoĩ doctrina oficialramo (dogma), Pío IX peve, ha’e omoĩ va’ekue upe jejapo tavy doctrínaramo oñemopyendáva Concilio Vaticano peteĩha-pe. Pe doctrina oñemoneĩ 18 jasypokõi ary 1870-pe, sa cien cincuenta ary exacto upe ára mboyve pe peteĩha jejavy guasu umi cien cuarenta y cuatro mil rehegua.
What is informative about the history is that when Pius IX organized the first Vatican Council, and implemented his doctrine of infallibility, his motivation was brought about by his hatred of what was called “modernism.” It was not rooted in the idea that a pope could make no errors when defining biblical doctrines, it was a defense of the papal opposition to the influence that had been produced by the French Revolution. It was directed against what would ultimately be known as Communism.
Pe mba’épa oikuaaukáva ko tembiasakue rehegua hína, Pío IX omohendárõ guare peteĩha Concilio Vaticano ha omoĩnguévo ipype pe doctrina de infalibilidad, imotivo ou va’ekue iñembojeguarúgui upe mba’épe hérava “modernismo”. Ndojehepyme’ẽri va’ekue pe idea rehe papa ndaikatuiha ojavy oñemyesakã jave doctrinas bíblicas, ha’e va’ekue peteĩ ñemo’ã pe oposición papal rehe umi influencia oñemoheñóiva’ekue Revolución Francesa rupive. Ojejapo va’ekue ombotovévo upe mba’e ipahápe ojekuaátava Comunismo ramo.
The French Revolution brought about an upheaval in the ruling structure of European nations, with a particular hatred for the monarchy that is the papacy. It was an Italian Republican revolt that had temporarily driven Pius IX, and his right-hand man out of Rome. The “modernism,” that was represented by the various philosophies that were produced by the French Revolution was Pius IX’s, arch enemy, and his doctrine of infallibility was designed to sustain every claim that the pope made against the modernists ideas that were produced by the French Revolution.
Pe Revolución Francesa ogueru peteĩ sarambi tuicháva umi tetã Europa-pe oporomburuvicha hag̃ua rehegua apytépe, peteĩ ñemborayhu’ỹ peteĩchagua reheve pe monarquía rehe, ha’éva papado. Ha’e va’ekue peteĩ pu’aka republicano italiano sapy’ami omosẽva’ekue Roma-gui Pío IX-pe, ha ijuayhuakue ykére oĩvape. Pe “modernismo”, ojehechaukáva’ekue umi opaichagua filosofía osẽva’ekue pe Revolución Francesa-gui rupive, ha’e va’ekue Pío IX rembihérava guasu; ha idoctrina de infalibilidad ojejapo va’ekue omombarete hag̃ua opaite mba’eclaim pe papa ojapóva umi idea modernista rehe, umi osẽva’ekue pe Revolución Francesa-gui.
Daniel chapter eleven, verse forty identifies that in 1798, the king of the south (atheistic France), delivered the deadly wound to the king of the north (the papacy).
Daniel capítulo once, versículo cuarenta, omombe’u porã 1798-pe pe mburuvicha yvy gotyo (Francia atea) ome’ẽ hague pe ñembyai ojukáva pe mburuvicha yvate gotyope (papado).
Pius IX’s doctrine of infallibility was connected with the war represented by verse forty of Daniel eleven, and from the latter part of 1869 to the following year Pius IX called together the first Vatican Council, known as Vatican 1, for the purpose of confirming that the pope was the head of Catholicism, and that Catholicism was the head of all the churches, as had been proclaimed by Justinian’s decree in the year 533.
Pío IX rembiapokue jeikekuaa’ỹ rehegua ojoajúkuri pe ñorairõ rehe ojehechaukáva Daniel capítulo once, versículo cuarenta-pe, ha ary 1869 paháguio pe ary oúva peve Pío IX ombyatýkuri peteĩha Concilio Vaticano, ojekuaáva Vaticano I ramo, upevarã oñemombarete hag̃ua pe papa ha’eha catolicismo akã, ha catolicismo ha’eha opaite tupao akã, he’iháicha kuri Justiniano decreto ary 533-pe.
The Second Vatican Council, also known as Vatican II, was held from 1962 to 1965. It was a landmark event in the history of the Catholic Church, and one of the most significant ecumenical councils in modern times. The council convened under the leadership of Pope John XXIII and continued during the pontificate of Pope Paul VI after John XXIII’s death in 1963. It is important to recognize the distinct difference between these two councils.
Mokõiha Concilio Vaticano, ojekuaáva avei Vaticano II ramo, oñemotenonde 1962 guive 1965 peve. Ha’e va’ekue peteĩ tembiapo tuichaitereíva Tupao Katóliko rembiasakue ryepýpe, ha peteĩva umi concilio ecuménico iñimportantevévagui ko’ág̃a rupi. Pe concilio oñembyaty Papa Juan XXIII sãmbyhy guýpe ha osegui Papa Pablo VI pontificado aja, Juan XXIII omanóramo rire ary 1963-pe. Tuicha mba’e jahechakuaa hag̃ua pe iñambue hag̃uáicha ko’ã mokõi concilio apytépe.
The first council was to establish what is called the “primacy,” of the pope, meaning that the pope is the supreme ruler, teacher and shepherd of the Church, responsible for preserving and interpreting the doctrines of faith. His authority consisted in defining dogmas, issuing doctrinal decrees, and making authoritative pronouncements on matters of faith and morals, known as papal infallibility. It includes the pope’s jurisdictional authority over the universal church, including the power to appoint bishops, regulate the sacraments, and govern the church’s administration.
Pe peteĩha aty guasu oñemopyenda hag̃ua pe mba’e ojeheróva “primacía” pe pápape guaréva, he’iséva pe pápa ha’eha pe mburuvicha guasu, mbo’ehára ha ovecharãha yvatevéva Tupaopegua, oguerekóva tembiaporã oñangareko ha omyesakã hag̃ua jerovia remimbo’e. Ipu’aka oike umi dogma ñemyesakãme, temimbo’e rehegua decreto osẽkueme, ha ñe’ẽme’ẽ guasu ojejapóvape jerovia ha teko porã rehegua mba’épe, ojekuaáva papal infalibilidad ramo. Upéva avei oike pe pápa poguýpe pe Tupao arapy tuichakue rehegua jurisdicción, oikehápe ipu’aka omoĩ hag̃ua obispo-kuérape, omohenda hag̃ua sacramento-kuérape, ha oguereko hag̃ua Tupao ñemboguata.
The second council was to redirect the church into an ecumenical entity. The councils were directly opposite propositions. The conservative first council was contradicted by the liberal second council. Those two factions were as different as night and day, and the prophecy that is attributed to the three secrets of Fatima identify an internal war fitly represented by these two councils.
Pe mokõiha aty guasu oreko vaʼekue tembiaporã omoambue hag̃ua tupão peteĩ entidad ecuménica ramo. Umi aty guasu haʼe vaʼekue peteĩteĩ oñemoĩva ojuehe opuesto hag̃ua. Pe peteĩha aty guasu conservador ojehovasáivaʼekue pe mokõiha aty guasu liberal reheve. Koʼã mokõi aty iñambueite ojuehegui pytũ ha áraicha, ha pe profesía oñeʼẽva umi mbohapy secreto Fatima-pegua rehe ohechauka peteĩ ñorairõ hyepypegua, añetépe ojehechaukáva koʼã mokõi aty guasu rupive.
The prophecy identifies a class who uphold the primacy represented by Pius IX as being represented by what is either called the “white pope,” the “good pope,” or the “good bishop”, and the other class, associated with Vatican II, are represented by the “black pope,” or the “bad pope,” or the “bad bishop.” The controversy of the two political concepts is represented when you visit the shrine of the miracle of Fatima, in Fatima, Portugal. When entering, the walkway is set between a statue of a black pope on one side, and a white pope on the other side.
Pe profesía ohechauka peteĩ aty, omoĩva tenonderãite Pío IX rehegua, ojejeguaháva pe oñembohéravare “papa morotĩ”, “papa iporãva”, térã “obispo iporãva”; ha ambue aty, ojoajúva Vaticano II ndive, ojejeguaha “papa hũ”, térã “papa vai”, térã “obispo vai”. Mokõi concepto político ñorairõ ojejeguaha rejahóramo pe tupaópe, milagro de Fátima rehegua, Fátima, Portugal-pe. Reikévo, tape ogueraha hag̃ua oñemohenda peteĩ ta’ãnga papa hũva peteĩ ykére, ha papa morotĩva ambue ykére.
It therefore becomes part of the heritage of the man that would ultimately become what the book identifies as Hitler’s pope, that his roots are entwined in the struggle between modernism (the king of the south), and papal primacy (the king of the north).
Upévare oiko chugui pe kuimbaʼe, ipahápe oikotava pe aranduka ohenóiva “Hitler remimboʼe guasu” hereditáriaramo, ha péicha he affunda hapykuere oñembojoaju porã pe ñorairõme oĩva modernismo (pe mburuvicha yvate gotyo gua’u, pe ñemboyke ñemby gotyo peguáva) ha pe papa primacía (pe mburuvicha yvate gotyo pegua) apytépe.
It is to be understood that the author of the book we are considering was a Catholic of good standing, and his stated purpose for writing the book was to shed light upon the claim that the pope that reigned during World War 2 had supported Hitler, the Nazi’s or had any culpability in the holocaust against the Jews, and others. When Cornwell addresses Pius XII’s grandfather, who was the right-hand man that ordained the Vatican 1 council, the history of the struggle between the kings of the south and north is being acted out in that very history. When the “Republicanism” revolution reached Italy, for about a year, the Italians drove Pius IX out of the city of Rome, and from then on, even after he returned, all the papacy has ever owned was the one hundred and ten acres, known as Vatican City.
Ojekuaa va’erã pe haihára aranduka ñamohesakãva ko’ápe ha’eha peteĩ católico oñembojeroviapyrãva, ha hembipota ohaívo pe aranduka ha’e va’ekue omyesakã hag̃ua pe ñemombe’u oje’éva pe papa oguapyva’ekue Mundi Aty Guasu Mokõiha aja ojokupyty hague Hitler rehe, umi nazi rehe, térã oguereko hague mba’eveichagua culpa pe holocausto ojapova’ekuépe umi judío rehe ha ambuekuéra rehe. Cornwell oñe’ẽ jave Pío XII jarýi rehegua, pe kuimba’e ha’éva pe ipo akatúa ha ombosako’íva Concilio Vaticano I, pe tembiasakue ñorairõ rehegua umi mburuvicha guasu yvy gotyo pegua ha yvy norte gotyo pegua apytépe ojehechauka upe tembiasakuépe voi. Pe revolución “Republicanismo” rehegua oguahẽ ramo Italia-pe, peteĩ áño rupi, umi italiano omosẽ Pío IX-pe Roma távagui, ha upéi guive, jepe ha’e ojevy jey rire, opa mba’e pe papado oguerekova’ekue ha’e umi cien diez hectárea añoite, ojekuaáva Ciudad del Vaticano ramo.
The only way he was even able to return to the Vatican is with the help of French troops, and a loan from the Rothschilds, the infamous Jewish bankers. To intelligently understand the papal complicity in the holocaust during World War II, requires some basic understanding of Europe’s attitude towards the Jews since the crucifixion of Christ. The book suggests that antisemitism and racism are two different attitudes, claiming Hitler’s hatred of the Jews was racist, for Hitler viewed the Jews as a lesser category of human beings, whereas antisemitism was the hatred of the Jews because they killed God. Whether they are one and the same, or there is actually a distinction between the two, the reality of the plight of the Jews is worth understanding.
Pe único tape ikatu hag̃uáicha ha’e jevy hag̃ua Vaticano-pe ha’e va’ekue pytyvõ rupive tropa francés-kuéra reheve, ha peteĩ préstamo Rothschild-kuéragui, umi banquero judío herakuã vaíva. Oñeikũmby hag̃ua arandúpe pe complicidad papal pe holocausto-pe Guerra Mundial Mokõihápe jave, tekotevẽ oñeikuaa porã hag̃ua Europa remiandu umi judío reheguápe Cristo kurusúre jepe guive. Pe aranduka he’i antisemitismo ha racismo ha’eha mokõi actitud iñambuéva, he’ívo Hitler ñembyasy’ỹ umi judío rehe racista hague, pórke Hitler ohecha umi judío-pe yvypóra aty michĩvévarõ; upéicha ramo jepe, antisemitismo ha’e pe ñembyasy’ỹ umi judío rehe oñe’ẽva ojuka hague Tupãme. Taha’e peteĩchante térã añetehápe oĩ peteĩ jehechauka iñambuéva mokõivéva apytépe, añetehápe pe mba’ehasa asy umi judío rehegua iporã oñeikũmby hag̃ua.
For instance, in America today if the word “ghetto,” is used most think it is the definition of the poor, run down side of town. But the term “ghetto,” originally referred to a section of a city, especially in Venice, Italy, where Jews were compelled to live during the Middle Ages. The first ghetto was established in Venice in 1516, when the Venetian Republic confined Jews to a designated area of the city known as the “geto nuovo” (new foundry), which eventually became known as the ghetto.
Techapyrã, ko árape Amérikape ojeporúramo ñe’ẽ “ghetto”, hetavéva oimoʼã upéva heʼiseha táva pehẽngue mboriahúva ha oñembyaipa hag̃uáicha. Hákatu pe ñe’ẽ “ghetto” ypykue heʼisevaʼekue peteĩ táva pehẽngue, koʼýte Venécia, Itáliape, upépe judío-kuéra oñembopyʼaguapy hag̃uáicha oiko hag̃ua Mbyte Árape. Pe ghetto peteĩha oñemoĩ Venéciape ary 1516-pe, upe jave República Veneciana omboty judío-kuérape peteĩ táva renda oñembohekopyrévape hérava “geto nuovo” (ñehundaha pyahu), ha upéva rire oñepyrũ ojekuaa hag̃ua ghetto ramo.
In Europe through the Middle Ages, Jews were restricted as to where they could live, and also the professions they were allowed to practice. The restrictions were based upon the old definition of antisemitism, which referred to the belief that the Jews had killed God, and that all of their subsequent problems had been brought upon themselves through their own actions.
Europa-pe, Edad Media pukukue aja, umi judíokuérape oñembotove moõ-pa ikatu oiko, ha avei mbaʼe tembiapo-pa oñemeʼẽ chupekuéra ojejapo hag̃ua. Koʼã jejoko ojeko vaʼekue pe definición yma guarére antisemita rehegua, heʼiséva pe jerovia umi judíokuéra ojuka hague Tupãme, ha opaite ijetuʼu oúva upe rire ogueru hague ijehegui voi ijehupytyrã, umi tembiapo ojapo vaʼekuére rupi.
In the Middle Ages, it was an established tradition that Christians could not lend money or accept interest for a loan. The Jews were exempt from that restriction, and lending money became one of the professions that Jews were allowed to perform. The Jewish bankers, such as the Rothschild family, were the money changers in response to legal restrictions against what professions they were allowed to perform. When Pius IX needed funds to return to the Vatican, the frustration of no longer ruling the city of Rome was magnified by his need to reach out to the Jews for money.
Mbyte Ypykuegua pe, oĩkuri peteĩ jepokuaa oñemopyendáva he’íva umi kristiáno ndaikatuiha oporopresta viru térã omoneĩ pe interese peteĩ préstamore. Umi judío katu oñeñotỹmbyre upe jejoko-gui, ha pe oporopresta viru oiko peteĩva umi tembiapo judíokuéra ikatúva omba’apo hag̃ua. Umi bankéro judío, Rothschild rogaygua-icha, ha’eva’ekue umi oñemoambuéva viru, umi ñemboguapy léi rehegua ombohováivo mba’eichagua tembiapópepa ikatúva omba’apo. Pío IX oikotevẽrõ guare viru ikatu hag̃uáicha ojevy Vaticano-pe, pe py’aro ndoguerekovéimarõ guare mburuvicha guasu reko táva Roma ári tuichave oñembohetave iñakãme ikatu hag̃uáicha ojerure umi judíope viru.
Prior to his being driven out of Rome Pius IX had appeared to be in one of two camps concerning the Jews and the church’s relation to the Jews. The two camps consisted of those who believed the Jews, no matter what happens to them, are simply getting what they deserve, and the other tended to show a little mercy towards the Jews. When Pius IX returned to the Vatican, after being driven out, the mercy he had sometimes manifested prior to his exile was never manifested again. Before his exile he had shut down the ghetto in the city of Rome, and after his return he re-established the ghetto, and began a taxation upon the Jews in order to regroup his financial losses.
Oñemosẽ mboyve Roma-gui Pío IX-pe, ha’e ojepresenta va’ekue peteĩ mokõi aty apytépe umi judío rehegua ha pe tupao relación umi judío ndive rehegua. Umi mokõi aty niko umi oguerovia va’ekue umi judío, oikove hag̃ua mba’eve ojehu chupekuéra, oikohína mante ohupyty hag̃ua pe omereséva, ha pe ambue katu ohechauka meme va’ekue michĩmi poriahuvereko umi judío rehe. Pío IX ojevy rire Vaticano-pe, oñemosẽ rire upégui, pe poriahuvereko sapy’ánte ohechauka va’ekue iñemosẽ mboyve araka’eve ndojehechaukavéi. Iñemosẽ mboyve omboty va’ekue pe gueto táva Roma-pe, ha ijevy rire omopu’ã jey pe gueto, ha oñepyrũ omoĩ impuesto umi judío ári ikatu hag̃uáicha ombyaty jey umi pérdida financiera oguerekova’ekue.
Pope Pius IX’s right-hand man was Marcantonio Pacelli, the grandfather of Hitler’s pope. He was an attorney that belonged to a special class of attorneys that supported the papacy. His son became part of that same elite class of attorneys, as did his grandson, who would ultimately become Hitler’s pope. After the book runs through the history of Eugenio Pacelli’s grandfather, his father, and his youth and education, it addresses the position that Pacelli took up as he began his work for the papacy. As an attorney, descending from the elite papal attorneys, he was picked to head up a department that specialized in contracts, which are called concords. In 1901 Pacelli was brought into the office of the Papal Secretariat of State.
Papa Pío IX akatupyra ha’e vaʼekue Marcantonio Pacelli, Hitler pápape guare túva guasu. Haʼe vaʼekue peteĩ abogado oikéva peteĩ aty ijojahaʼỹva abogado-kuérape, oipytyvõva pe papado. Itaʼýra oike upe clase selecta abogado-kuéra peguápe avei; upéicha avei itaʼýra raʼy, ipahápe oikótava Hitler pápape. Pe lívro, ohasa rire Eugenio Pacelli túva guasu rembiasakue, itúva rembiasakue, ha imitãrusu ha iñemoarandu, ojepyʼapy pe tenda Pacelli ojagarravaʼekue oñepyrũvo hembiapo pe papado rehehápe. Abogado ramo, oguejýva umi abogado papal selecto-gui, ojeporavo chupe omyakã hag̃ua peteĩ departamento oñembokatupyryvaʼekue umi contrato-pe, hérava concordato. Áño 1901-pe Pacelli oñemoinge pe oficina Secretaría de Estado Papal-pe.
Pacelli became the envoy to the nations. Prophetically Pacelli became the legal point of contact that consummated the fornication of the kings of the earth with the papacy. In 1903, Pius X was coronated as pope. Immediately he began to attack the “intellectual poison” that produced “relativism and skepticism.” The man who ran Pius X’s effort to eradicate “modernism” was Umberto Benigni, who worked in the same office as Pacelli. Benigni once stated of a group of world-class historians, that they were men for whom, “history is nothing but a continual desperate attempt to vomit. For this sort of human being there is only one remedy: the inquisition!” To Benigni, a historian that expressed any sympathy with the ideas that came from the French Revolution were to be executed.
Pacelli oiko tetãnguéra rendaguépe. Marandu-profétikamente, Pacelli oiko pe punto legal de contacto omohu’ãva umi mburuvichakuéra yvy arigua tekovai papado ndive. Áño 1903-pe, Pío X oñemoĩ koróna hag̃ua papa ramo. Pya’evoi oñepyrũ ombohovái pe “veneno intelectual” omoheñóiva “relativismo ha escepticismo”. Pe kuimba’e omoakãva Pío X rembiapo omboyke hag̃ua pe “modernismo” ha’eva’ekue Umberto Benigni, omba’apóva pe oficina peteĩme Pacelli ndive. Benigni peteĩ jey he’i va’ekue peteĩ aty tembiasakuehai kuéra rehe, ha’ekuéraha kuimba’ekuéra oikohápe g̃uarã, “tembiasakue ndaha’éi mba’eve ambue peteĩ ñeha’ã py’ahatã tapiaite hag̃uáicha ojegueru jevy hag̃ua tembi’u.” Koichagua yvypórape g̃uarã oĩ peteĩ pohãnte: ¡pe Inquisición! Benigni-pe g̃uarã, peteĩ tembiasakuehai ohechaukáva oimeraẽ mborayhu’asy umi idea osẽva’ekue Revolución Francesa-gui ojejuka va’erã.
Officially, Benigni ran the propaganda ministry for the papacy, but unofficially he also ran a clandestine spy network, designed to identify any Catholics that had any sympathy for the “modernism,” that had originated with the king of the south. Ultimately in 1910, his work produced a directive that obliged employees of the papacy to swear an oath, called the Antimodernist Oath. It is still in force. To be employed by the Vatican you must swear to a hatred of modernist ideas, which today we would call communistic ideas.
Ofisiálmente, Benigni omoakã vaʼekue papádo pehẽngue marandu ñemyasãi rembiguái, ha ndaipóriháicha ojekuaáva, omoakã avei peteĩ ñemiha marandu ñembyaty ha ñemondohápe guare, oñemoheñóiva ojekuaa hag̃uáicha mayma católico ohechaukáva mbaʼeveichagua pyʼaporã pe “modernismo” rehe, pe ou vaʼekue mburuvicha guasu yvy gotyo sud-gua gui. Ipahápe, ary 1910-pe, hembiapo oguenohẽ peteĩ tembiapoukapy ombohováiva papádo rembiguáipekuéra toñembojurúvo peteĩ juramento rehe, hérava Juramento Antimodernista. Upéva gueteri oĩ mbaʼeporãme. Oñembaʼapo hag̃uáicha Vaticano-pe, tekotevẽ rejura rehayhuʼỹha umi idea modernista, koʼág̃arupi ñande jaʼétava idea comunista.
In the summary of Cronwell’s book, on the flyleaf it states, “In the first decade of the century, as a brilliant young Vatican lawyer, Pacelli helped shape an ideology of unprecedented papal power; during the 1920’s he employed cunning and blackmail to impose power in Germany. In 1933, Hitler became his perfect negotiating partner and a concordant was established that granted religious and educational advantages to the Catholic Church in exchange for Catholic withdrawal from social and political action. This ‘voluntary’ abdication of political Catholicism imposed from Rome facilitated the rise of Nazism.
Cronwell rembiasakue ñemombykypýpe, kuatiarogue tenondépe he’i: “Sa’ary peteĩha pukukue jave, peteĩ abogado Vaticano pegua mitãrusu ha arandu porãramo, Pacelli oipytyvõ ombohekopyrévo peteĩ ideología oguerekóva Papa pokatu araka’eve ojehecha’ỹva; ary 1920 rupi katu oiporu pokarẽ ha chantaje omoĩ hag̃ua pokatu Alemania-pe. Ary 1933-pe, Hitler oiko chugui iñirũ iporãvéva oñeñe’ẽ hag̃ua hendive, ha oñemopyenda peteĩ concordato ome’ẽva ventaja religiosa ha tekombo’e rehegua Tupao Katólikape, Católico-kuéra ojeipe’ávo tekove social ha tembiapo político-gui. Ko ‘voluntaria’ jejora política catolicismo rehegua, Roma-gui oñemoĩva, ombohape Nazismo ñemopu’ã.”
At a cabinet meeting on July 14, 1933, Adolph Hitler expressed his opinion that very month that the concordance manufactured by Pacelli with the Nazi’s gave Germany created “an area of trust…. In the developing struggle against international Jewry.”
Peteĩ aty gabinete-pegua ojejapóvape 14 de julio de 1933-pe, Adolph Hitler omombe’u upe jasyteĩme hembiandu, pe concordato Pacelli ojapova’ekue nazi-kuéra ndive Alemániape guarã ome’ẽ hague Alemania-pe “peteĩ jerovia renda…. ñorairõ okakuaávape judío-kuéra internacional rehe.”
Cornwell’s book was not well received by Catholics who refused to accept the evidence that Pacelli was the primary reason that Hitler was able to rise to power, for Germany was a majority of Catholics. Pacelli had struck an agreement that prevented the Catholic publishing house, Catholic news agencies and Catholic schools from saying anything about the direction of Hitler from 1933 onward. The book traces the obvious anti-Semitic bent of Pacelli, who thereafter became the pope during World War II. At least three items can be established on very reliable historical sources from the book.
Cornwell aranduka noñemoguahẽ porãieteva’ekue católico-kuéra apytépe, ndoaseptaséigui hikuái pe evidencia ohechaukáva Pacelli ha’eha pe razón tenondegua rupi Hitler ikatu haguã ojupi pu’akápe, Alemania ningo hetave hína católico-kuéragui. Pacelli ojapo va’ekue peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ omboykéva pe imprenta católica, umi marandu rape católico ha umi mbo’ehao católico ani hag̃ua he’i mba’eveichagua mba’e Hitler rape rehe, ary 1933 guive. Pe aranduka omyesakã Pacelli jeiko ojekuaáva heko anti-semita rehegua, ha upéi upéva rire ha’e oiko chugui papa Guerra Mundial Mokõiha aja. Mbohapy mba’e por lo menos ikatu oñemopyenda porãiterei umi fuente histórica jeroviaha ári ko aranduka guive.
The first is the warfare of the king of the north and the king of the south, as represented in Daniel chapter eleven. In that warfare the enemies are Catholicism against atheism, the pope against Communism. The other point is that the pope employed Nazism as his proxy army against atheism during World War II, just as the pope employed apostate Protestantism in 1989, as its proxy army against the atheism of the USSR. The book also identifies the internal and external prophetic structure represented by the satanic messages that came forth from the miracle at Fatima.
Peteĩha ha’e pe ñorairõ mburuvicha yvate pegua ha mburuvicha yvy gotyo pegua apytépe, oñerrepresentaháicha Daniel kuatiañe’ẽ pahapy peteĩha kapítulpe. Upe ñorairõme umi enemigo ha’e Catolicismo peteĩ gotyo ha ateísmo ambue gotyo, pára ha Comunismo ojoavy hag̃ua. Ambue punto ha’e pára oipuru hague Nazismo-pe ijeheguive hag̃ua ñorairõhára ramo ateísmo rehe Guerra Mundial Mokõihápe aja, peteĩchaitehápe pára oipuru hague Protestantismo apóstata-pe ary 1989-pe, ijeheguive hag̃ua ñorairõhára ramo URSS pegua ateísmo rehe. Pe aranduka avei ohechauka pe estructura profética interna ha externa oñerrepresentáva umi marandu satanás guigua osẽ va’ekue pe milagro Fatima-pe guápe.
The borderline war of Raphia, represented in verses eleven and twelve of Daniel eleven, represent the war of the borderline currently playing out in the Ukraine. The ancient war was a hot war, the second is the second proxy war, with the proxy armies involved in mortal interaction. Raphia identifies the borderline war as being between the king of the north and the king of the south, but prophecy teaches that until the soon coming Sunday law, the whore of Tyre is forgotten, Jezebel is in Samaria, and Herodias skipped Herod’s birthday party. Those three witnesses of the role of the king of the north in this current history, is that she is behind the scenes pulling the strings. The hot wars, proxy wars and cold wars that happen while she is forgotten are accomplished by her proxy armies.
Rafia ñorairõ rembe’ýpegua, oñerepresentáva Daniel 11 pe ayvuapy 11 ha 12-pe, ohechauka ko’ág̃a oñemoañetéva rembe’y ñorairõ Ucrania-pe. Pe ñorairõ yma guare va’ekue peteĩ ñorairõ haku va’ekue; pe mokõiha katu hína pe mokõiha ñorairõ proxy, umi ejército proxy oikehápe peteĩ joaju ñorairõrã oporojukáva. Rafia ohechauka pe rembe’y ñorairõ oĩha pe mburuvicha yvate gotyogua ha pe mburuvicha yvy gotyogua apytépe; profecía katu ombo’e, pe arapokõindy pya’e ou hag̃uáicha peve, pe kuña rekovéva Tirogua oñembyesarái, Jezabel oĩ Samaria-pe, ha Herodías ndoikéi Herodes aramboty areterãme. Umi mbohapy testígo ohechaukáva pe mburuvicha yvate gotyogua rembiapo ko tembiasakue ko’ág̃aguápe, he’ise ha’eha kañyhápe omongu’éva umi sã. Umi ñorairõ haku, umi ñorairõ proxy ha umi ñorairõ ro’ysã oikóva pe kuña oñembyesarái aja, ojejapo ijehérsito proxy rupive.
Russia is the king of the south, and it is now involved in a borderline war that is being financed by the globalists of the Western world, primarily the progressive Democrats and RINO (Republican In Name Only) Republicans in the United States. When the United States is represented as the king of the north’s proxy army in verse forty of Daniel eleven, its two prophetic characteristics are military might and financial power. The United States is accomplishing the same work in Ukraine that it did in 1989, helping the Pope against Russia, and the proxy army on the ground, defending Ukraine, is so full of Nazi supporters that even the mainstream media cannot deny it. Rome is now using the same proxy armies that she used in the hot war that was World War II, and in 1989, to war against Russia. Read the book: Hitler’s Pope, the Secret History of Pius XII.
Rusia ha’e pe mburuvicha yvy gotyo, ha ko’ág̃a oike peteĩ ñorairõ rembe’ýpe ojehepyme’ẽva umi globalista mundo kuarahyreikegua rehegua rupive, tenonderãite umi Demócrata progresista ha umi Republicano RINO (Republicano réra añónte rehegua) Estados Unidos-pe. Ári Estados Unidos ojehechauka ramo pe mburuvicha yvate gotyo proxy ehérsito ramo Daniel capítulo once, versículo cuarenta-pe, mokõi heko profético ha’e mbarete militar ha pu’aka viru rehegua. Estados Unidos ojapoína Ucrania-pe upe tembiapoite ojapo va’ekue 1989-pe, oipytyvõvo pe Papa-pe Rusia rehe, ha pe proxy ehérsito oĩva yvýpe, oñangarekóva Ucrania rehe, henyhẽiterei umi nazismo pytyvõhára-gui, jepe umi medio de comunicación principalgua ndaikatúi omoneĩ’ỹ upéva. Roma ko’ág̃a oipurujey umi proxy ehérsito peteĩchagua umi oipurúva’ekue pe ñorairõ haku asývape, ha’éva Segunda Guerra Mundial, ha 1989-pe, oñorairõ hag̃ua Rusia rehe. Emoñe’ẽ pe aranduka: Hitler’s Pope, the Secret History of Pius XII.
We will continue this study in the next article.
Ñamoguata hag̃ua ko estudio rehegua pe artíkulo oúvape.
“In like manner, when God was about to open to the beloved John the history of the church for future ages, He gave him an assurance of the Saviour’s interest and care for His people by revealing to him ‘One like unto the Son of man,’ walking among the candlesticks, which symbolized the seven churches. While John was shown the last great struggles of the church with earthly powers, he was also permitted to behold the final victory and deliverance of the faithful. He saw the church brought into deadly conflict with the beast and his image, and the worship of that beast enforced on pain of death. But looking beyond the smoke and din of the battle, he beheld a company upon Mount Zion with the Lamb, having, instead of the mark of the beast, the ‘Father’s name written in their foreheads.’ And again he saw ‘them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God’ and singing the song of Moses and the Lamb.
“Upéicha avei, Tupã oikóvo omboja hag̃ua pe Juan ohayhúva renondépe pe tembiasakue tupaogua umi ára oútavape g̃uarã, ome'ẽ chupe peteĩ jeroviaha pe Salvador oñangarekóha ha oĩha interesado Ipuévlope rehe, oikuaaukávo chupe ‘Peteĩ ojoguáva Yvypóra Ra'ype’, oguata hag̃ua umi kandeléro apytépe, umi ohechaukáva umi pokõi tupao. Juanpe ojehechaukárõ guare pe tupaogua ñeorãirõ guasu paha umi mburuvicha yvy ariguándi, avei ojeheja chupe ohecha hag̃ua pe ipahapegua jehupyty ha jepe'a umi jeroviapývape g̃uarã. Ha'e ohecha pe tupao ogueraha py'aguasu'ỹre peteĩ ñorairõ omano hag̃uápe pe mymba vai ha ta'ãnga ndive, ha pe mymba vai ñemomba'e guasu oñembopy'a guasuha ñemanóre. Péro omañávo pe tata tatatĩ ha pe ñorairõ sapukái ári, ha'e ohecha peteĩ aty Monte Sión ári pe Ovecha Ra'y ndive, oguerekóva, pe mymba vai techaukaha rendaguépe, pe ‘Túva réra ojehaíva hova renondépekuéra.’ Ha jey avei ha'e ohecha ‘umi ohupyty va'ekue pe jehupyty pe mymba vai ári, ha ta'ãnga ári, ha techaukaha ári, ha héra papaha ári, oñembo'ýva pe yguasu vidrio guigua ári, oguerekóvo Tupã arpa-kuéra’ ha opurahéi hag̃ua Moisés ha pe Ovecha Ra'y purahéi.”
“These lessons are for our benefit. We need to stay our faith upon God, for there is just before us a time that will try men’s souls. Christ, upon the Mount of Olives, rehearsed the fearful judgments that were to precede His second coming: ‘Ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars.’ ‘Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows.’ While these prophecies received a partial fulfillment at the destruction of Jerusalem, they have a more direct application to the last days.
“Koʼã mboʼe ñanepytyvõ hag̃ua. Tekotevẽ ñamopyenda ñande jerovia Tupã rehe, oĩgui ñande renondete peteĩ ára ohaʼãtava kuimbaʼekuéra ánga. Cristo, Yvyty Olivoty ári, omombeʼu jey umi huísio kyhyjéva oútava Ijuvy mokõihápe mboyve: ‘Peẽ pehendúta ñorairõ ha ñorairõ rehegua ñeʼẽngue.’ ‘Tetã opuʼãta tetã rehe, ha mburuvichaguasu renda ambue mburuvichaguasu renda rehe: ha oĩta ñembyahýi, mbaʼasy vai, ha yvyryrýi heta hendápe. Koʼãva opavave niko ñembyasy ñepyrũnte.’ Jepémo koʼã profesía oguereko vaʼekue peteĩ ñemyanyhẽ peteĩ hendáicha Jerusalén ñehundípe, oguereko hikuái peteĩ jehechakuaa hag̃ua iporãvéva umi ára pahápe.”
“We are standing on the threshold of great and solemn events. Prophecy is fast fulfilling. The Lord is at the door. There is soon to open before us a period of overwhelming interest to all living. The controversies of the past are to be revived; new controversies will arise. The scenes to be enacted in our world are not yet even dreamed of. Satan is at work through human agencies. Those who are making an effort to change the Constitution and secure a law enforcing Sunday observance little realize what will be the result. A crisis is just upon us.
“Ñaimê hína umi mba’e guasu ha solemne oikótava rembe’ýpe. Pe profesía pya’e oñekumpli hína. Ñandejára oĩ okẽme. Mbykymi rire ojepe’áta ñande renondépe peteĩ áraha ipyahúva tuichaiterei interés oguerekóva opa umi oikovévape guarã. Umi ñorairõrã yma guare oñemoingove jeýta; osẽta avei ñorairõrã pyahu. Umi escena ojejapótava ñande yvy ape ári neĩ gueteri ndoñepensái hesekuéra. Satanás omba’apo hína yvypóra rembiporu rupive. Umi oñeha’ãva omoambue hag̃ua pe Constitución ha ohupyty hag̃ua peteĩ léi ombojeroviáva domingo ñemboarete, michĩeterei oikuaa mba’éta pe resultado. Peteĩ krísis oĩma ñande ári.”
“But God’s servants are not to trust to themselves in this great emergency. In the visions given to Isaiah, to Ezekiel, and to John we see how closely heaven is connected with the events taking place upon the earth and how great is the care of God for those who are loyal to Him. The world is not without a ruler. The program of coming events is in the hands of the Lord. The Majesty of heaven has the destiny of nations, as well as the concerns of His church, in His own charge.” Testimonies, volume 5, 752, 753.
“Péro Tupã rembiguái ndopytava’erã ojeroviávo ijehekuéra ko ára hasýpe guasúpe. Umi jehechapyre oñeme’ẽva’ekuépe Isaíaspe, Ezequiélpe ha Juánpe, jahecha mba’éichapa yvága ojoaju porã umi mba’e oikóva ko yvy ári ndive, ha mba’eichaitépa tuicha Tupã ñangareko umi hese jeroviáva ha hekopotĩvape g̃uarã. Ko yvy arigua mundo ndopytái peteĩ mburuvicha’ỹre. Umi mba’e oútava rape oĩ Ñandejára pópe. Yvága Mburuvicha Guasu oguereko tetãnguéra rekove rape, ha avei Iglésia rembiasakue ha ñeñangareko, ipópe voi.” Testimonies, volúmen 5, 752, 753.