Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number One-Hundred and Seventy-Three

Daniels Bog – Nummer et hundrede og treoghalvfjerds

The Papal Shadows: Unveiling the Influence and Intentions Behind “Hitler’s Pope”

De pavelige skygger: En afsløring af indflydelsen og hensigterne bag »Hitlers pave«

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

April 3, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

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.

I bogen med titlen *Hitler’s Pope* begynder forfatteren John Cornwell fortællingen om den fremtidige pave, som regerede, da Hitler herskede i Tyskland, med hans bedstefar og pave Pius IX, der blev drevet ud af byen Rom. Da Pius IX flygtede fra byen Rom, forklædt som en nonne, var den eneste mand, han tog med sig, den fremtidige paves bedstefar. Cornwell behandler det nære forhold mellem de to mænd og påviser derefter, hvordan den fremtidige paves far også var knyttet til den katolske kirkes magtcentrum. Derved identificerer han det sociale, politiske og religiøse miljø i historien fra Pius IX’s tid og frem til Anden Verdenskrig. Denne historiske oversigt er overordentlig informativ.

> “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.

> „Endnu et skridt i den pavelige selvophøjelse blev taget, da pave Gregor VII i det ellevte århundrede proklamerede den romerske kirkes fuldkommenhed. Blandt de påstande, som han fremsatte, var én, der erklærede, at kirken aldrig havde fejlet og heller aldrig ville fejle, ifølge Skrifterne. Men skriftbeviserne ledsagede ikke påstanden. Den hovmodige pontif gjorde også krav på magten til at afsætte kejsere og erklærede, at ingen dom, som han afsagde, kunne omstødes af nogen, men at det var hans prærogativ at omstøde alle andres afgørelser.“

> “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.

> "En slående illustration af denne forkæmper for ufejlbarligheds tyranniske karakter blev givet i hans behandling af den tyske kejser Henrik IV. Fordi denne monark vovede at tilsidesætte pavens myndighed, blev han erklæret ekskommuniceret og afsat. Skræmt af sine egne fyrsters frafald og trusler, idet de blev opmuntret til oprør imod ham ved det pavelige påbud, følte Henrik nødvendigheden af at forsone sig med Rom. Sammen med sin hustru og en trofast tjener krydsede han Alperne midt om vinteren for at ydmyge sig for paven. Da han nåede slottet, hvortil Gregor havde trukket sig tilbage, blev han, uden sine vagter, ført ind i en ydre borggård, og dér afventede han i vinterens strenge kulde, med utildækket hoved og bare fødder og iført elendige klæder, pavens tilladelse til at træde frem for ham. Først efter at han i tre dage havde fortsat med at faste og aflægge bekendelse, nedlod pontiffen sig til at tilstå ham tilgivelse. Selv da skete det kun på den betingelse, at kejseren skulle afvente pavens billigelse, før han på ny tog kongedømmets insignier i brug eller udøvede den kongelige magt. Og Gregor, opløftet over sin sejr, pralede af, at det var hans pligt at nedbryde kongers hovmod." 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.

Gregor VII var en „fortaler for ufejlbarligheden“, men denne latterlige påstand blev ikke gjort til officiel lære (dogme), før Pius IX, som gjorde den tåbelige påstand til fastslået lære ved det første Vatikankoncil. Læren blev vedtaget den 18. juli 1870, på dagen et hundrede og halvtreds år før den første skuffelse hos de hundrede og fireogfyrre tusinde.

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.

Det, der er oplysende ved historien, er, at da Pius IX organiserede det første Vatikankoncil og gennemførte sin lære om ufejlbarlighed, blev hans bevæggrund fremkaldt af hans had til det, der blev kaldt „modernisme“. Den var ikke forankret i den tanke, at en pave ikke kunne begå fejl, når han definerede bibelske læresætninger; den var et forsvar for pavemagtens modstand mod den indflydelse, som var blevet frembragt af den Franske Revolution. Den var rettet imod det, som i sidste ende skulle blive kendt som kommunismen.

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.

Den Franske Revolution medførte en omvæltning i de europæiske nationers regeringsstruktur, med et særligt had til det monarki, som pavedømmet er. Det var et italiensk republikansk oprør, der midlertidigt havde fordrevet Pius IX og hans højre hånd fra Rom. Den „modernisme“, som var repræsenteret ved de forskellige filosofier, der blev frembragt af Den Franske Revolution, var Pius IX’s ærkefjende, og hans lære om ufejlbarlighed var udformet til at opretholde ethvert krav, som paven fremsatte imod de modernistiske idéer, der blev frembragt af Den Franske Revolution.

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 kapitel elleve, vers fyrre, identificerer, at sydens konge (det ateistiske Frankrig) i 1798 tilføjede nordens konge (pavedømmet) det dødelige sår.

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.

Pius IX’s lære om ufejlbarlighed var forbundet med den krig, som er fremstillet i Daniel 11, vers 40, og fra den sidste del af 1869 til det følgende år sammenkaldte Pius IX det første Vatikankoncil, kendt som Vatikan I, med det formål at bekræfte, at paven var katolicismens overhoved, og at katolicismen var alle kirkers overhoved, således som det var blevet proklameret ved Justinians dekret i året 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.

Det Andet Vatikankoncil, også kendt som Vatican II, blev afholdt fra 1962 til 1965. Det var en skelsættende begivenhed i den katolske kirkes historie og et af de mest betydningsfulde økumeniske konciler i moderne tid. Koncilet blev sammenkaldt under pave Johannes XXIII’s ledelse og fortsatte under pave Paul VI’s pontifikat efter Johannes XXIII’s død i 1963. Det er vigtigt at erkende den tydelige forskel mellem disse to konciler.

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.

Det første koncil skulle fastslå det, der kaldes pavens „primat“, hvilket betyder, at paven er Kirkens øverste hersker, lærer og hyrde, ansvarlig for at bevare og fortolke troens læresætninger. Hans myndighed bestod i at definere dogmer, udstede læremæssige dekreter og afgive autoritative udtalelser i spørgsmål om tro og moral, kendt som pavelig ufejlbarlighed. Det omfatter pavens jurisdiktionelle myndighed over den universelle kirke, herunder magten til at udnævne biskopper, regulere sakramenterne og lede kirkens administration.

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.

Det andet koncil skulle omdirigere kirken til en økumenisk enhed. Koncilerne var direkte modsatte forslag. Det konservative første koncil blev modsagt af det liberale andet koncil. Disse to fraktioner var så forskellige som nat og dag, og profetien, som tilskrives Fatimas tre hemmeligheder, identificerer en indre krig, der passende repræsenteres ved disse to konciler.

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.

Profetien identificerer en klasse, som opretholder det forrang, der er repræsenteret ved Pius IX, som værende repræsenteret ved det, der enten kaldes den „hvide pave“, den „gode pave“ eller den „gode biskop“, og den anden klasse, som er forbundet med Vatican II, er repræsenteret ved den „sorte pave“ eller den „onde pave“ eller den „onde biskop“. Kontroversen mellem de to politiske begreber er fremstillet, når man besøger helligdommen for miraklet i Fatima i Fatima, Portugal. Når man træder ind, er gangstien anlagt mellem en statue af en sort pave på den ene side og en hvid pave på den anden side.

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).

Det bliver derfor en del af arven hos den mand, der til sidst skulle blive det, som bogen identificerer som Hitlers pave, at hans rødder er sammenflettet med kampen mellem modernismen (sydens konge) og det pavelige primat (nordens konge).

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.

Det må forstås, at forfatteren til den bog, vi her behandler, var en katolik i god anseelse, og at hans erklærede formål med at skrive bogen var at kaste lys over påstanden om, at den pave, der regerede under Anden Verdenskrig, havde støttet Hitler, nazisterne eller på nogen måde havde skyld i holocaust mod jøderne og andre. Når Cornwell omtaler Pius XII’s bedstefar, som var den højre hånd, der tilvejebragte Vatikankoncil I, udspilles historien om kampen mellem sydens og nordens konger i netop denne historie. Da den „republikanske“ revolution nåede Italien, fordrev italienerne i omkring et år Pius IX ud af byen Rom, og fra da af har pavedømmet, også efter at han vendte tilbage, aldrig ejet andet end de hundrede og ti acres, kendt som Vatikanstaten.

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.

Den eneste måde, hvorpå han overhovedet var i stand til at vende tilbage til Vatikanet, var med hjælp fra franske tropper og et lån fra Rothschild-familien, de berygtede jødiske bankierer. For på en kvalificeret måde at forstå pavemagtens medskyldighed i holocaust under Anden Verdenskrig kræves en vis grundlæggende forståelse af Europas holdning til jøderne siden Kristi korsfæstelse. Bogen antyder, at antisemitisme og racisme er to forskellige holdninger, idet den hævder, at Hitlers had til jøderne var racistisk, eftersom Hitler betragtede jøderne som en lavere kategori af mennesker, hvorimod antisemitisme var hadet til jøderne, fordi de dræbte Gud. Hvad enten de er ét og det samme, eller der faktisk består en sondring mellem de to, er virkeligheden i jødernes lidelser værd at forstå.

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.

For eksempel vil de fleste i Amerika i dag, hvis ordet »ghetto« bruges, mene, at det er betegnelsen for den fattige, nedslidte del af byen. Men betegnelsen »ghetto« henviste oprindeligt til en del af en by, især i Venedig, Italien, hvor jøder under middelalderen blev tvunget til at bo. Den første ghetto blev oprettet i Venedig i 1516, da den venetianske republik tvang jøder til at opholde sig i et afgrænset område af byen, kendt som »geto nuovo« (nyt støberi), som efterhånden kom til at blive kendt som ghettoen.

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.

I Europa gennem middelalderen var jøder begrænset med hensyn til, hvor de kunne bo, og også hvilke erhverv de havde tilladelse til at udøve. Begrænsningerne byggede på den gamle definition af antisemitisme, som henviste til troen på, at jøderne havde dræbt Gud, og at alle deres efterfølgende problemer var blevet bragt over dem selv gennem deres egne handlinger.

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.

I middelalderen var det en fast etableret tradition, at kristne ikke måtte udlåne penge eller modtage renter for et lån. Jøderne var fritaget for denne begrænsning, og udlån af penge blev et af de erhverv, som jøder havde tilladelse til at udøve. De jødiske bankierer, såsom familien Rothschild, var vekselererne som følge af de juridiske restriktioner for, hvilke erhverv de havde lov til at udøve. Da Pius IX havde brug for midler til at vende tilbage til Vatikanet, blev frustrationen over ikke længere at herske over byen Rom forstærket af hans behov for at række ud til jøderne for at få penge.

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.

Før han blev drevet ud af Rom, syntes Pius IX at tilhøre den ene af to lejre med hensyn til jøderne og kirkens forhold til jøderne. De to lejre bestod af dem, der mente, at jøderne, hvad der end hænder dem, blot får, hvad de fortjener, og den anden hældede til at vise en smule barmhjertighed mod jøderne. Da Pius IX vendte tilbage til Vatikanet, efter at være blevet drevet bort, blev den barmhjertighed, han undertiden havde udvist før sit eksil, aldrig mere udvist. Før sit eksil havde han lukket ghettoen i byen Rom, og efter sin tilbagevenden genoprettede han ghettoen og pålagde jøderne en beskatning for at genvinde sine økonomiske tab.

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.

Pave Pius IX’s højre hånd var Marcantonio Pacelli, bedstefar til Hitlers pave. Han var en jurist, som tilhørte en særlig klasse af jurister, der støttede pavedømmet. Hans søn blev en del af den samme eliteklasse af jurister, og det gjorde hans sønnesøn også, ham, der til sidst skulle blive Hitlers pave. Efter at bogen gennemgår historien om Eugenio Pacellis bedstefar, hans far samt hans ungdom og uddannelse, behandler den den stilling, som Pacelli indtog, da han begyndte sit arbejde for pavedømmet. Som jurist, nedstammet fra de pavelige elitejurister, blev han udvalgt til at stå i spidsen for en afdeling, der specialiserede sig i kontrakter, som kaldes konkordater. I 1901 blev Pacelli knyttet til kontoret for Pavestatens Statssekretariat.

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 blev udsendingen til nationerne. Profetisk set blev Pacelli det retlige kontaktpunkt, som fuldbyrdede jordens kongers utugt med pavedømmet. I 1903 blev Pius X kronet til pave. Straks begyndte han at angribe den „intellektuelle gift“, som frembragte „relativisme og skepsis“. Den mand, der ledede Pius X’s bestræbelse på at udrydde „modernismen“, var Umberto Benigni, som arbejdede i samme kontor som Pacelli. Benigni udtalte engang om en gruppe historikere i verdensklasse, at de var mænd, for hvem „historien ikke er andet end et vedvarende desperat forsøg på at kaste op. For denne slags menneske findes der kun ét middel: inkvisitionen!“ For Benigni skulle en historiker, der gav udtryk for nogen som helst sympati for de idéer, der udsprang af den Franske Revolution, henrettes.

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.

Officielt ledede Benigni pavestolens propagandaministerium, men uofficielt ledede han også et hemmeligt spionnetværk, udformet til at identificere enhver katolik, der nærede nogen sympati for den „modernisme“, som havde sin oprindelse hos sydens konge. I sidste ende frembragte hans arbejde i 1910 et direktiv, der pålagde pavestolens ansatte at aflægge en ed, kaldet den antimodernistiske ed. Den er stadig i kraft. For at være ansat i Vatikanet må man sværge had til modernistiske idéer, som vi i dag ville kalde kommunistiske idéer.

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.

I sammendraget af Cronwells bog står der på smudsomslaget: »I århundredets første årti bidrog Pacelli, som en strålende ung vatikanjurist, til at forme en ideologi om en hidtil uset pavelig magt; i 1920’erne gjorde han brug af list og afpresning for at påtvinge Tyskland magten. I 1933 blev Hitler hans perfekte forhandlingspartner, og der blev indgået et konkordat, som gav den katolske kirke religiøse og uddannelsesmæssige fordele til gengæld for katolsk tilbagetrækning fra social og politisk handling. Denne ’frivillige’ abdikation af den politiske katolicisme, påtvunget fra Rom, lettede nazismens fremvækst.«

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.”

Ved et regeringsmøde den 14. juli 1933 gav Adolph Hitler udtryk for den opfattelse, at det konkordat, som Pacelli havde udarbejdet med nazisterne, samme måned skabte for Tyskland »et tillidsområde … i den tiltagende kamp mod det internationale jødedom.«

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.

Cornwells bog blev ikke godt modtaget af katolikker, som nægtede at acceptere beviserne for, at Pacelli var den primære årsag til, at Hitler var i stand til at komme til magten, for Tyskland var overvejende katolsk. Pacelli havde indgået en aftale, som forhindrede det katolske forlag, katolske nyhedsagenturer og katolske skoler i fra 1933 og frem at sige noget om den retning, Hitler tog. Bogen påviser Pacellis åbenlyst antisemitiske tilbøjelighed, han som senere blev pave under Anden Verdenskrig. På grundlag af bogen kan mindst tre forhold fastslås ud fra meget pålidelige historiske kilder.

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.

Det første er krigen mellem kongen af nord og kongen af syd, som fremstillet i Daniels bog, kapitel elleve. I denne krig er fjenderne katolicismen mod ateismen, paven mod kommunismen. Det andet punkt er, at paven benyttede nazismen som sin stedfortrædende hær mod ateismen under Anden Verdenskrig, ligesom paven benyttede frafalden protestantisme i 1989 som sin stedfortrædende hær mod USSR’s ateisme. Bogen identificerer også den indre og ydre profetiske struktur, som fremstilles ved de sataniske budskaber, der udgik fra miraklet i 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.

Grænsekrigen ved Raphia, fremstillet i vers elleve og tolv i Daniel elleve, repræsenterer den grænsekrig, der i øjeblikket udspiller sig i Ukraine. Den gamle krig var en varm krig; den anden er den anden stedfortræderkrig, hvor de involverede stedfortræderhære er engageret i dødelig konfrontation. Raphia identificerer grænsekrigen som værende mellem kongen i nord og kongen i syd, men profetien lærer, at indtil den snart kommende søndagslov bliver Tyrus’ skøge glemt, Jezabel er i Samaria, og Herodias sprang Herodes’ fødselsdagsfest over. Disse tre vidner om kongen i nords rolle i denne nuværende historie er, at hun bag kulisserne trækker i trådene. De varme krige, stedfortræderkrige og kolde krige, der finder sted, mens hun er glemt, udføres af hendes stedfortræderhære.

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.

Rusland er sydens konge, og landet er nu involveret i en grænsekrig, der finansieres af den vestlige verdens globalister, først og fremmest de progressive demokrater og RINO-republikanere (Republican In Name Only) i De Forenede Stater. Når De Forenede Stater i vers fyrre i Daniel elleve fremstilles som nordens konges stedfortrædende hær, er landets to profetiske kendetegn militær styrke og finansiel magt. De Forenede Stater udfører i Ukraine det samme værk, som det gjorde i 1989, idet det hjælper paven imod Rusland, og den stedfortrædende hær på jorden, der forsvarer Ukraine, er så fuld af nazistiske tilhængere, at selv de etablerede medier ikke kan benægte det. Rom benytter nu de samme stedfortrædende hære, som hun benyttede i den varme krig, der var Anden Verdenskrig, og i 1989, til at føre krig imod Rusland. Læs bogen: Hitler’s Pope, the Secret History of Pius XII.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Vi vil fortsætte dette studium i den næste artikel.

> “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.

> „På samme måde, da Gud stod i begreb med at åbne kirkens historie for de kommende tidsaldre for den elskede Johannes, gav Han ham en forsikring om Frelserens interesse for og omsorg for sit folk ved at åbenbare for ham ‘en, der lignede Menneskesønnen,’ vandrende iblandt lysestagerne, som symboliserede de syv menigheder. Mens Johannes fik vist kirkens sidste store kampe med jordiske magter, blev det også tilladt ham at skue de trofastes endelige sejr og udfrielse. Han så kirken ført ind i dødelig strid med dyret og dets billede, og tilbedelsen af dette dyr påbudt under dødsstraf. Men idet han så hinsides kampens røg og larm, skuede han en skare på Zions bjerg sammen med Lammet, som i stedet for dyrets mærke havde ‘sin Faders navn skrevet på deres pander.’ Og atter så han ‘dem, som havde vundet sejr over dyret og over dets billede og over dets mærke og over tallet på dets navn, stå på glashavet med Guds harper’ og synge Moses’ og Lammets sang.“

> “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.

> “Disse lærdomme er til vort gavn. Vi må støtte vor tro på Gud, for lige foran os ligger en tid, som vil prøve menneskers sjæle. Kristus gennemgik på Oliebjerget de frygtelige domme, som skulle gå forud for Hans andet komme: ‘I skal høre om krige og rygter om krige.’ ‘Folk skal rejse sig mod folk, og rige mod rige; og der skal være hungersnød og pest og jordskælv mange steder. Alt dette er begyndelsen til veerne.’ Skønt disse profetier fik en delvis opfyldelse ved Jerusalems ødelæggelse, har de en mere direkte anvendelse på de sidste dage.”

> “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.

> „Vi står på tærsklen til store og højtidelige begivenheder. Profetien går hastigt i opfyldelse. Herren står for døren. Snart vil der for os åbne sig en periode af overvældende interesse for alle levende. Fortidens stridsspørgsmål skal genoplives; nye stridsspørgsmål vil opstå. De scener, som skal udspilles i vor verden, er endnu ikke engang drømt om. Satan er i virksomhed gennem menneskelige redskaber. De, som bestræber sig på at ændre forfatningen og sikre en lov, der håndhæver søndagshelligholdelse, aner kun lidet, hvad følgen vil blive. En krise står umiddelbart for døren.

> “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.

> "Men Guds tjenere må ikke stole på sig selv i denne store krise. I de syner, som blev givet Esajas, Ezekiel og Johannes, ser vi, hvor nært himlen er forbundet med de begivenheder, der finder sted på jorden, og hvor stor Guds omsorg er for dem, der er Ham tro. Verden er ikke uden en hersker. Programmet for de kommende begivenheder er i Herrens hånd. Himmelens Majestæt har nationernes skæbne såvel som anliggenderne i sin menighed i sin egen varetægt." Testimonies, bind 5, 752, 753.

Back to Articles