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.
Ao amin’ilay boky mitondra ny lohateny hoe *Hitler’s Pope*, ny mpanoratra John Cornwell dia manomboka ny tantaran’ilay papa ho avy, izay nanjaka tamin’ny andro nanapahan’i Hitler an’i Alemaina, amin’ny firesahana ny raiben’ity papa ho avy ity sy ny Papa Pius IX, izay samy noroahina hiala tao amin’ny Tanànan’i Roma. Rehefa nandositra niala tao amin’ny tanànan’i Roma i Pius IX, niova endrika ho masera, dia ny hany lehilahy nentiny niaraka taminy dia ny raiben’ilay papa ho avy. Cornwell dia miresaka ny fifandraisana akaiky nisy teo amin’ireo lehilahy roa ireo, ary avy eo dia manondro ny fomba izay nifandraisan’ny rain’ilay papa ho avy koa tamin’ny foiben’ny fahefana tao amin’ny Fiangonana Katolika. Tamin’izany no amaritany ny tontolo ara-tsosialy sy ara-politika ary ara-pivavahana nisy teo amin’ny tantara hatramin’ny andron’i Pius IX ka hatramin’ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa. Ny topimaso ankapobeny momba ny tantara dia tena mampahalala tokoa.
“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.
“Nisiana dingana iray hafa koa no noraisina tao amin’ny fiheveran-tena maha-paapa, rehefa, tamin’ny taonjato faha-iraika ambin’ny folo, ny Papa Grégoire VII nanambara ny fahatanterahan’ny Fiangonana Romana. Anisan’ny fanambarana navoakany ny iray izay nilaza fa tsy mbola diso velively ny fiangonana, ary tsy ho diso na oviana na oviana, araka ny Soratra Masina. Kanefa tsy nisy porofo avy amin’ny Soratra Masina nanaraka izany filazana izany. Ilay pontifa feno fireharehana koa dia nitaky ny fahefana hanongana amperora, ary nanambara fa tsy misy didim-pitsarana navoakany azo foanan’iza na iza, fa azy kosa ny zo manokana hanafoana ny fanapahan-kevitry ny hafa rehetra.”
“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.
“Nisy fanoharana manaitra iray momba ny toetra jadona nananan’ity mpiaro ny tsy fetezana ity hita tamin’ny fomba nitondrany ny amperora alemà, i Henri IV. Noho izy sahy tsy niraharaha ny fahefan’ny papa, dia nambara fa voaroaka tsy ho ao amin’ny fiangonana sy nesorina teo amin’ny seza fiandrianany io mpanjaka io. Nampihorohoroina noho ny fialàn’ireo andriana teo aminy sy ny fandrahonan’izy ireo, izay nohamafisin’ny didy navoakan’ny papa hikomiana aminy, dia tsapan’i Henri fa tsy maintsy mihavana amin’i Roma izy. Niaraka tamin’ny vadiny sy mpanompo mahatoky iray izy no niampita ny Alpes tamin’ny antsasaky ny ririnina, mba hanetry tena eo anatrehan’ny papa. Rehefa tonga teo amin’ny lapa izay nialokalofan’i Grégoire izy, dia notarihina, tsy nisy ny mpiambina azy, ho any amin’ny tokotany ivelany, ary tao, teo ambanin’ny hatsiaka mangidy tamin’ny ririnina, sady tsy nisaron-doha no tsy niaro tongotra, ary nitafy fitafiana fadiranovana, dia niandry ny fanomezan-dàlan’ny papa hiditra eo anatrehany izy. Tsy raha efa naharitra hateloana nifadina hanina sy nanao fiaiken-keloka izy vao niondrika hanome famelan-keloka azy ilay papa. Ary na dia tamin’izany aza, dia teo ambanin’ny fepetra ihany izany, fa tsy maintsy niandry ny fankatoavan’ny papa ny amperora vao afaka nandray indray ny mariky ny fanjakana na nampihatra ny fahefan’ny mpanjaka. Ary i Grégoire, niavonavona noho ny fandreseny, dia nirehareha fa adidiny ny mampietry ny fireharehan’ny mpanjaka.” Ny Hery Mifanditra, 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.
Gregory VII dia “mpanohana ny tsy fahadisoana,” saingy io filazana mampihomehy io dia tsy natao ho foto-pampianarana ofisialy (dogma) raha tsy tamin’i Pius IX, izay nampiorina io filazana adaladala io ho foto-pampianarana raikitra tao amin’ny Konsily Voalohan’i Vatikana. Nankatoavina tamin’ny 18 Jolay 1870 izany foto-pampianarana izany, zato sy dimampolo taona katroka talohan’ny fahadisoam-panantenana voalohan’ny iray hetsy sy efatra alina arivo.
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.
Ny mampahalala ao amin’ny tantara dia izao: rehefa nandamina ny Kônsily Vatikana Voalohany i Pius IX, ary nampihatra ny foto-pampianarany momba ny tsy fahadisoan’ny papa, dia ny fankahalany ilay nantsoina hoe “modernisma” no nanosika azy. Tsy niorina tamin’ny hevitra hoe tsy mahazo manao fahadisoana ny papa rehefa mamaritra foto-pampianarana ara-Baiboly izany, fa fiarovana ny fanoheran’ny fahefana papaly ny hery miasa avy amin’ny fiantraikany nateraky ny Revolisiona Frantsay. Natao hanoherana izay ho fantatra tatỳ aoriana amin’ny anarana hoe Kominisma izany.
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.
Ny Revolisiona Frantsay dia niteraka fikorontanana teo amin’ny rafitra fitondrana tao amin’ny firenena eoropeana, niaraka tamin’ny fankahalana manokana ny fanjakam-panjaka izay ny papa no lohany. Fikomiana repoblikana italiana no nandroaka vetivety an’i Pius IX sy ny lehilahy havany indrindra hiala tao Roma. Ny “modernisma”, izay nasehon’ireo filozofia isan-karazany nateraky ny Revolisiona Frantsay, no fahavalo lehibe indrindra tamin’i Pius IX, ary ny foto-pampianarany momba ny tsy fahadisoana dia natao hanohanana ny fitakiana rehetra nataon’ny papa nanohitra ireo hevitra modernista izay nateraky ny Revolisiona Frantsay.
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).
Ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo, andininy faha-efapolo, dia aseho fa tamin’ny taona 1798, ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo (Frantsa tsy mino an’Andriamanitra) no namely ny ratra mahafaty ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra (ny fahefana papaly).
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.
Ny foto-pampianaran’i Pius IX momba ny tsy fetezan-diso dia nifandray tamin’ilay ady asehon’ny andininy faha-efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo; ary nanomboka tamin’ny faramparan’ny taona 1869 ka hatramin’ny taona nanaraka dia niantso sy namory ny Konsily Vaticanina voalohany, fantatra amin’ny hoe Vatican 1, i Pius IX, mba hanamafisana fa ny papa no lohan’ny Katôlika, ary ny Katôlika no lohan’ny fiangonana rehetra, araka izay efa nambara tamin’ny didin’i Justinien tamin’ny taona 533.
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.
Ny Konsily Vatikana Faharoa, izay fantatra koa amin’ny hoe Vatikana II, dia notanterahina nanomboka tamin’ny 1962 ka hatramin’ny 1965. Zava-nisongadina teo amin’ny tantaran’ny Fiangonana Katolika izany, ary anisan’ireo konsily ekiomenika manan-danja indrindra tamin’ny vanim-potoana maoderina. Nivory teo ambanin’ny fitarihan’i Papa Joany XXIII ilay konsily, ary nitohy nandritra ny fotoam-pitondran’i Papa Paoly VI izany taorian’ny nahafatesan’i Joany XXIII tamin’ny 1963. Zava-dehibe ny manaiky ny fahasamihafana miavaka misy eo amin’ireo konsily roa ireo.
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.
Ny konsily voalohany dia natao hanorenana izay antsoina hoe “laharam-pahamboniana” an’ny papa, izany hoe ny papa no mpitondra, mpampianatra ary mpiandry ambony indrindra ny Fiangonana, tompon’andraikitra amin’ny fitandrovana sy ny fanazavana ny fotopampianaran’ny finoana. Ny fahefany dia nisy tamin’ny famaritana ny dogma, famoahana didy ara-pampianarana, ary fanaovana fanambarana manam-pahefana momba ny raharahan’ny finoana sy ny fitondran-tena, izay fantatra amin’ny hoe tsy fetezan’ny papa diso. Tafiditra ao anatin’izany koa ny fahefam-pitsarany eo amin’ny Fiangonana maneran-tany, anisan’izany ny fahefana hanendry eveka, handamina ny sakramenta, ary hitantana ny raharaham-pitantanan’ny Fiangonana.
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.
Ny konsily faharoa dia natao hampivily ny fiangonana ho tonga vondrona ekiomenika. Nifanohitra mivantana ny tolokevitra napetraky ny konsily roa tonta. Ny konsily voalohany, izay nifikitra tamin’ny nentin-drazana, dia notoherin’ny konsily faharoa, izay liberaly. Ireo antoko roa ireo dia samy hafa tahaka ny alina sy ny andro, ary ny faminaniana izay ampifandraisina amin’ny tsiambaratelo telo tao Fatima dia manondro ady anatiny izay asehon’ireo konsily roa ireo amin’ny fomba tena mifanaraka.
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.
Ny faminaniana dia manondro sokajy iray izay manohana ny laharam-pahamehana asehon’i Pius IX ho aseho amin’ilay antsoina hoe “papa fotsy”, na “papa tsara”, na “eveka tsara”; ary ny sokajy iray hafa, izay mifandray amin’ny Vatican II, dia asehon’ilay “papa mainty”, na “papa ratsy”, na “eveka ratsy.” Ny fifanolanana misy eo amin’ireo foto-kevitra ara-politika roa ireo dia aseho rehefa mitsidika ny fitoerana masina fahatsiarovana ny fahagagana tao Fatima, any Fatima, Portiogaly, ianao. Rehefa miditra, ny lalan-kely fidirana dia apetraka eo anelanelan’ny sarivongan’ny papa mainty eo an-daniny iray sy ny papa fotsy eo an-daniny iray hafa.
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).
Koa lasa anisan’ny lovan’ilay lehilahy izay hiafara ho tonga ilay lazain’ny boky ho papa-n’i Hitler izany, ka ny fakany dia mifamatotra ao anatin’ny tolona misy eo amin’ny moderinisma (ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo) sy ny fahefana fara tampon’ny papa (ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra).
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.
Tokony ho takarina fa ny mpanoratra ny boky izay hodinihintsika dia Katolika manana toerana tsara, ary ny tanjona nambarany tamin’ny fanoratana io boky io dia ny hanazava ny fiampangana fa ny papa izay nanjaka nandritra ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa dia nanohana an’i Hitler, ny Nazia, na nanana heloka tamin’ny fandripahana ny Jiosy sy ny hafa. Rehefa miresaka momba ny raiben’i Pius XII i Cornwell, izay lehilahy ankavanana nandrindra ny Konsily Vatican I, dia tanterahina ao anatin’izany tantara izany indrindra ny tantaran’ny adin’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo sy ny avaratra. Rehefa tonga tany Italia ny revolisiona “Repoblikanisma”, dia noroahin’ny Italiana hiala tao an-tanànan’i Roma i Pius IX nandritra ny herintaona teo ho eo, ary hatramin’izay, na dia taorian’ny niverenany aza, ny hany fananan’ny papa hatrizay dia ilay velaran-tany zato sy folo eka, fantatra amin’ny anarana hoe Tanànan’i Vatican.
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.
Ny hany fomba nahafahany niverina tany Vatican akory aza dia noho ny fanampian’ny tafika frantsay sy ny fampindramam-bola avy amin’ny Rothschilds, ireo banky jiosy malaza ratsy laza. Mba hahatakarana amim-pahendrena ny firaisana tsikombakomba nataon’ny papa tamin’ny holokosta nandritra ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa, dia ilaina ny manana fahatakarana fototra momba ny fihetsiky Eoropa tamin’ny Jiosy hatramin’ny nanomboana an’i Kristy tamin’ny hazofijaliana. Manolotra ny boky fa toe-tsaina roa samy hafa ny fankahalana Jiosy sy ny fanavakavaham-bolon-koditra, amin’ny filazana fa fanavakavaham-bolon-koditra no fototry ny fankahalan’i Hitler ny Jiosy, satria noheverin’i Hitler ho sokajin’olombelona ambany kokoa ny Jiosy; kanefa ny fankahalana Jiosy kosa dia fankahalana ny Jiosy satria izy ireo no namono an’Andriamanitra. Na iray ihany ireo, na tena misy tokoa aza ny fanavahana eo amin’izy roa, dia mendrika ho takarina ny zava-misy momba ny fahoriana nanjo ny Jiosy.
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.
Ohatra, any Amerika amin’izao andro izao, raha ampiasaina ny teny hoe “ghetto,” dia ny ankamaroan’ny olona no mihevitra fa izany no famaritana ny faritra mahantra sy rava amin’ny tanàna. Kanefa ny voambolana hoe “ghetto,” tamin’ny niandohany, dia nanondro ampahany iray amin’ny tanàna, indrindra tany Venise, Italia, izay nanerena ny Jiosy honina nandritra ny Moyen Âge. Ny ghetto voalohany dia naorina tany Venise tamin’ny taona 1516, rehefa nanery ny Jiosy hifetra ao amin’ny faritra voatondro iray ao an-tanàna, fantatra amin’ny anarana hoe “geto nuovo” (toeram-pandoroana metaly vaovao), ny Repoblika Venetiana; izay nony farany dia nanjary fantatra amin’ny anarana hoe ghetto.
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.
Tany Eorôpa nandritra ny Moyen Âge, dia noferana ny Jiosy momba izay toerana azon’izy ireo nonenana, ary koa ny asa sy ny raharaham-pivelomana navela hotanterahiny. Niorina tamin’ilay famaritana taloha ny antisemitisma ireo fameperana ireo, izay nanondro ny finoana fa ny Jiosy no namono an’Andriamanitra, ary ny olana rehetra nanjo azy ireo tatỳ aoriana dia nateraky ny asan’izy ireo ihany.
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.
Tamin’ny Moyen Âge, dia fomban-drazana efa niorina tsara ny hoe tsy mahazo mampindram-bola na mandray zana-bola amin’ny fampindramam-bola ny Kristiana. Tsy voafehin’izany fameperana izany ny Jiosy, ary ny fampindramam-bola dia tonga anisan’ny asa navela hataon’ny Jiosy. Ireo mpampindram-bola jiosy, tahaka ny fianakaviana Rothschild, no mpanakalo vola noho ny fameperana ara-dalàna napetraka tamin’ireo karazan’asa navela hataon’izy ireo. Rehefa nila vola i Pius IX mba hiverenany any Vatikana, dia vao mainka nihamafy ny fahasosorany noho ny tsy naha-mpanapaka azy intsony tao an-tanànan’i Roma, satria voatery nitodika tamin’ny Jiosy izy mba hangataka vola.
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.
Talohan’ny nandroahana azy hiala tao Roma, i Pius IX dia toa isan’ny lafy roa mikasika ny Jiosy sy ny fifandraisan’ny fiangonana amin’ny Jiosy. Ireo lafy roa ireo dia ny an’ireo izay nino fa ny Jiosy, na inona na inona manjo azy, dia mahazo fotsiny izay tandrifiny, sy ny an’ireo hafa izay nirona haneho famindram-po kely tamin’ny Jiosy. Rehefa niverina tao Vatikana i Pius IX, taorian’ny nandroahana azy, dia tsy naseho intsony velively ilay famindram-po izay indraindray nasehony talohan’ny sesitany nahazo azy. Talohan’ny sesitany dia nakatony ny getto tao an-tanànan’i Roma, ary nony niverina izy dia naoriny indray ny getto, sady nanomboka nampandoa hetra ny Jiosy mba hanonerana indray ny fatiantoka ara-bolany.
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.
Ny lehilahy havanan’i Papa Pio IX dia i Marcantonio Pacelli, raiben’ilay papa an’i Hitler. Mpisolovava izy, ary anisan’ny sokajy manokana tamin’ireo mpisolovava izay nanohana ny papa. Ny zanany lahy dia tonga anisan’io sokajy ambony io ihany koa, ary toy izany koa ny zafiny, izay hiafara ho papa an’i Hitler. Rehefa avy mandinika ny tantaran’ny raiben’i Eugenio Pacelli sy ny rainy ary ny fahatanorany sy ny fianarany ilay boky, dia miresaka ny toerana noraisin’i Pacelli rehefa nanomboka ny asany ho an’ny papa izany. Amin’ny maha-mpisolovava azy, izay taranak’ireo mpisolovava ambony papaly, dia nofidina izy hitarika sampan-draharaha iray izay manokana amin’ny fifanarahana, izay antsoina hoe konkorda. Tamin’ny taona 1901 dia nampidirina tao amin’ny biraon’ny Sekretariam-panjakana Papaly i Pacelli.
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 dia tonga iraka ho an’ireo firenena. Araka ny faminaniana, Pacelli dia tonga teo amin’ny toerana ara-dalàna ifandraisana izay nahatanteraka ny fijangajangan’ny mpanjakan’ny tany tamin’ny papa. Tamin’ny taona 1903, dia nohosorana ho papa i Pius X. Avy hatrany dia nanomboka nanafika ny “poizina ara-tsaina” izay niteraka ny “relativisma sy ny fisalasalana” izy. Ny lehilahy izay nitantana ny ezak’i Pius X hamongotra ny “modernisma” dia i Umberto Benigni, izay niasa tao amin’io birao io ihany niaraka tamin’i Pacelli. Indray mandeha i Benigni dia nilaza momba ny antokon’olona mpahay tantara ambony indrindra maneran-tany fa, izy ireo dia lehilahy izay ho azy, “ny tantara dia tsy inona fa fiezahana mitohy sady feno famoizam-po handoa. Ho an’ny karazan’olombelona tahaka izao dia tsy misy afa-tsy fanafody iray ihany: ny inkizisiôna!” Ho an’i Benigni, ny mpahay tantara iray izay naneho firaisam-po tamin’ireo hevitra izay nivoaka avy tamin’ny Revolisiona frantsay dia tokony hovonoina.
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.
Amin’ny fomba ofisialy, i Benigni no nitantana ny sampan-draharahan’ny propagandy ho an’ny papazia, kanefa tamin’ny fomba tsy ofisialy dia izy koa no nitarika tambajotram-pitsikilovana miafina, natao hamantarana izay Katolika rehetra nanana fironana na fangorahana tamin’ilay “modernisma,” izay niainga avy tamin’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo. Tamin’ny farany, tamin’ny 1910, ny asany dia namoaka toromarika iray izay nanery ireo mpiasan’ny papazia hanao fianianana, antsoina hoe Fianianana Manohitra ny Modernisma. Mbola manan-kery izany. Mba ho azo ampiasaina ao amin’ny Vatikana dia tsy maintsy mianiana hankahala ny hevitra modernista ianao, izay antsointsika ankehitriny hoe hevitra komonista.
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.
Ao amin’ny famintinana ny bokin’i Cronwell, eo amin’ny pejy fiarovana dia milaza hoe: “Tao anatin’ny folo taona voalohan’ny taonjato, fony i Pacelli mbola mpahay lalàna tanora sady nahatalanjona tao Vatikana, dia nanampy tamin’ny famolavolana foto-kevitra iray momba ny fahefana papa tsy mbola nisy tahaka azy izy; nandritra ny taona 1920 kosa dia nampiasa hafetsena sy fandrahonana izy mba hampanjaka fahefana tany Alemaina. Tamin’ny 1933, i Hitler no tonga mpiara-miombon-kevitra lavorary indrindra taminy teo amin’ny fifampiraharahana, ary natsangana ny konkordà iray izay nanome tombontsoa ara-pivavahana sy ara-panabeazana ho an’ny Fiangonana Katolika, ho takalon’ny fialàn’ny Katolika amin’ny asa sosialy sy politika. Io fialana an-tsitrapo’ amin’ny Katolisisma politika napetraka avy any Roma io no nanamora ny fiakaran’ny Nazisma.”
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.”
Tamin’ny fivorian’ny governemanta tamin’ny 14 Jolay 1933, dia naneho ny heviny i Adolph Hitler tamin’io volana io ihany fa ny fifanarahana nataon’i Pacelli tamin’ny Nazi dia nanome an’i Alemaina ka namorona “sehatry ny fitokisana…. ao anatin’ny ady mivoatra atao amin’ny Jiosy iraisam-pirenena.”
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.
Ny bokin’i Cornwell dia tsy noraisin’ny Katolika tsara, satria nandà tsy hanaiky ny porofo izy ireo fa i Pacelli no antony lehibe nahafahan’i Hitler niakatra teo amin’ny fahefana, fa i Alemaina rahateo dia firenena izay Katolika no maro an’isa. Nanao fifanarahana i Pacelli izay nandrara ny trano famoaham-boky katolika, ny sampam-baovao katolika ary ny sekoly katolika tsy hiteny na inona na inona momba ny fironan’i Hitler nanomboka tamin’ny 1933 sy taorian’izany. Asehon’ilay boky ny fironana miharihary manohitra ny Jiosy tao amin’i Pacelli, izay tatỳ aoriana dia tonga papa nandritra ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa. Farafahakeliny, teboka telo no azo aorina avy amin’ilay boky amin’ny loharano ara-tantara tena azo itokisana.
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.
Ny voalohany dia ny adin’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, araka ny aseho ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo. Ao anatin’izany ady izany, ny fahavalo dia ny Katôlika mifanandrina amin’ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra, ny papa mifanandrina amin’ny Kominisma. Ny teboka iray hafa dia izao: ny papa dia nampiasa ny Nazisma ho tafika solontenany hiadiana amin’ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra nandritra ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa, tahaka ny nampiasan’ny papa ny Protestantisma nihemotra tamin’ny 1989 ho tafika solontenany hiadiana amin’ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra tao amin’ny USSR. Ilay boky koa dia mamantatra ny rafitra ara-paminaniana anatiny sy ivelany asehon’ireo hafatra satanika izay nivoaka avy tamin’ilay fahagagana tao Fatima.
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.
Ny ady eo amin’ny sisintany tao Rafia, izay aseho ao amin’ny andininy fahairaika ambin’ny folo sy faha‑roa ambin’ny folo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo, dia maneho ny ady eo amin’ny sisintany izay miseho ankehitriny any Okraina. Ady mafana ilay ady fahiny; ilay faharoa kosa dia ny ady solontena faharoa, izay ahitana ny tafika solontena tafiditra amin’ny fifandonana mahafaty. Rafia dia manondro fa ny ady eo amin’ny sisintany dia eo amin’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, kanefa ny faminaniana dia mampianatra fa mandra‑pahatongan’ny lalàn’ny Alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela, dia hadino ilay vehivavy janga avy any Tyro, Jezebela dia ao Samaria, ary Herodiasy dia niala tamin’ny lanonan’ny tsingerintaonan’i Heroda. Ireo vavolombelona telo momba ny anjara asan’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra amin’ity tantara ankehitriny ity dia manambara fa izy no ao ambadiky ny sehatra, misintona ny tady. Ny ady mafana, ny ady solontena ary ny ady mangatsiaka izay mitranga raha mbola hadino izy dia tanterahin’ny tafika solontenany.
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.
Rosia no mpanjakan’ny atsimo, ary ankehitriny izy dia tafiditra ao anatin’ny ady eny amin’ny sisintany izay vatsian’ireo globalista ao amin’ny tontolo tandrefana, indrindra fa ireo Demokraty progresista sy ireo Repoblikana RINO (Republican In Name Only) any Etazonia. Rehefa aseho ho toy ny tafika solontenan’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra i Etazonia ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo amin’ny Daniela 11, dia hery ara-miaramila sy fahefana ara-bola no toetra ara-paminaniana roa ananany. Etazonia dia manatanteraka any Okraina ilay asa nataony tamin’ny 1989 ihany, dia ny fanampiana ny Papa hiady amin’i Rosia, ary ny tafika solontena eny ifotony, miaro an’i Okraina, dia feno mpanohana Nazia tokoa ka na dia ny fampahalalam-baovao mahazatra aza dia tsy afaka mandà izany. Roma ankehitriny dia mampiasa ireo tafika solontena ihany izay nampiasainy tamin’ilay ady mivaivay izay Ady Lehibe Faharoa, sy tamin’ny 1989, mba hiadiana amin’i Rosia. Vakio ny boky: Hitler’s Pope, the Secret History of Pius XII.
We will continue this study in the next article.
Hotohizantsika ao amin’ny lahatsoratra manaraka ity fandalinana ity.
“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.
Toy izany koa, rehefa hasehon’Andriamanitra amin’i Jaona malala ny tantaran’ny fiangonana ho amin’ny andro mbola ho avy, dia nomeny toky azy ny amin’ny fitiavan’ny Mpamonjy sy ny fiahiany ny olony tamin’ny fanambarany taminy an’“Ilay mitovy amin’ny Zanak’olona,” nandehandeha teo afovoan’ny fanaovan-jiro, izay naneho ireo fiangonana fito. Raha naseho tamin’i Jaona ny ady lehibe farany hifanaovan’ny fiangonana amin’ny fahefana eto an-tany, dia navela hahita koa izy ny fandresena farany sy ny fanafahana ny mahatoky. Hitan’i Jaona ny fiangonana voatarika ho amin’ny fifandonana mahafaty amin’ny bibidia sy ny sariny, ary ny fanompoam-pivavahana amin’izany bibidia izany noterena hatao amin’ny fandrahonana ho faty. Kanefa, raha nihoatra ny setroka sy ny tabataban’ny ady ny fijeriny, dia nahita vahoaka iray teo an-tendrombohitra Ziona niaraka tamin’ny Zanak’ondry izy, izay tsy nitondra ny mariky ny bibidia, fa nanana kosa ny “anaran’ny Rainy voasoratra eo amin’ny handriny.” Ary indray, dia hitany “ireo izay efa nahazo ny fandresena tamin’ny bibidia sy ny sariny sy ny mariny ary ny isan’ny anarany, nitsangana teo ambonin’ny ranomasina fitaratra, nitana ny lokangan’Andriamanitra,” ka nihira ny fihiran’i Mosesy sy ny Zanak’ondry.
“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.
“Ireo lesona ireo dia ho amin’ny tombontsoantsika. Mila mampiorina ny finoantsika amin’Andriamanitra isika, fa eo anoloantsika indrindra dia misy fotoana iray izay hizaha toetra ny fanahin’ny olona. Kristy, teo an-Tendrombohitr’i Oliva, dia namerina ny fitsarana mahatahotra izay hialoha ny fihaviany fanindroany hoe: ‘Handre ady sy siosion-dresaka momba ny ady ianareo.’ ‘Hisy firenena hitsangana hanohitra firenena, ary fanjakana hanohitra fanjakana; ary hisy mosary sy areti-mandringana ary horohoron-tany any amin’ny toerana samihafa. Izany rehetra izany no fiandohan’ny fahoriana.’ Na dia nahazo fahatanterahana ampahany aza ireo faminaniana ireo tamin’ny fandravana an’i Jerosalema, dia manana fampiharana mivantana kokoa amin’ny andro farany izy ireo.”
“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.
“मिहत्सिञोनि आनी गम्भीर घतनासमुहनि थ्रेशोल्ड-आव जों थादों। भावबानी खामानाय पुराव जातांदों। प्रभु दुअाराव आसे। दानि सोरजोंहा गोजौ जिउनाय गासैनि थाखाय बेसेन गोजोन रोखा-गोनां मोनसे समाय जोंनि सन्मुखाव मेल खालामगोन। आगोलनि बिबादफोर फिन जागायजागोन; गोदान बिबादफोरहा जायतोगोन। जोंनि फृथिबीयाव मावनाय थाखाय थानाय दृश्यफोर एखनसोलो मानसिफ्रा सानोबो सानायाखै। सायथान मानसि एजेंसिफोरनि गेजेरजों खामानि मावदों। जोंखौ संविधान सोलायनो जागायनाय आरो देबोरा माननायखौ जोरजों मावथायनाय मोनसे आइनो दिहुनो जायोब्ला बेनि फोल मोनसेबो बुग्रायो। मोनसे संकट गासैसोनि सिगांयाव जोंनि गेजेराव दं।”
“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.
“Saingy ny mpanompon’Andriamanitra dia tsy tokony hatoky ny tenany amin’izao fotoan-tsarotra lehibe izao. Ao amin’ny fahitana nomena an’i Isaia sy i Ezekiela ary i Jaona no ahitantsika fa tena akaiky tokoa ny fifandraisan’ny lanitra amin’ireo zava-mitranga eo ambonin’ny tany, ary lehibe tokoa ny fiahian’Andriamanitra an’ireo izay mahatoky Aminy. Tsy tsy manam-pitondra izao tontolo izao. Eo an-tanan’ny Tompo ny fandaharan’ireo zava-mitranga ho avy. Ny Voninahitr’ny lanitra no mitantana ao Aminy ihany ny anjaran’ny firenena, ary koa ny raharahan’ny fiangonany.” Testimonies, boky faha-5, 752, 753.