EIPS SermonAudio.com
Menu Items
Start Page · Search
Rome In the News
Answers (Q&A)
Audio Sermons
Photo Gallery
Our Guestbook
Errors of Rome
Caustic Comments
History Lessons
Rome & Politics
Sword (Bible)
How To Witness
EIPS Lectures
Feature Articles
EIPS Courses
Other Interest

Monday, September 25, 2017
Date Posted:

Jesuit Loyola

Jesuits' Strategy
Mary & Holy Spirit
Greatest Weapons
Irresistible Weapon
5 Fallible Infallibles
Williamite Revolution
Reformation Battle

The Jesuits and their Strategy to destroy Britain

Lecture at the Fourth EIPS Seminar
Professor Arthur Noble

Introduction: Focus

The English poet Robert Southey (1774-1843), who wrote a famous biography of Lord Nelson, once gave the following famous satirical description of a Jesuit:

A Jesuit may be shortly described as an empty suit of clothes with another person living in them, who acts for him, thinks for him, decides for him whether he shall be a prince or a beggar, and moves him about wheresoever he pleases; who allows him to exhibit the internal aspect of a man, but leaves him none of the privileges – no liberty, no property, no affections, not even the power to refuse obedience when ordered to commit the most atrocious of crimes; for, the more he outrages his own feelings, the greater his merits. Obedience to the superior is his only idea of virtue, and in all other respects he is a mere image. [Quoted in The Protestant Echo, Vol. XX, 1899, p. 86.]

Unfortunately for humanity, history demonstrates that the Jesuits were no mere image, but a most fearsome and gruesome reality. When the Bill for legalising Jesuitism was set down for its second reading in the House of Commons on June 7, 1899, The Protestant Echo warned the public of the likely consequences by quoting the following words of Rev. Dr. J.A. Wylie, author of the book Jesuitism: Its Rise, Progress and Insidious Workings [London, undated]:

To what country of Europe shall we turn where we are not able to track the Jesuit by his bloody footprints? […] How many assassins they sent to England to murder Elizabeth history attests. […] Nor is it only the palaces of monarchs into which they have crept with their doctrines of murder and assassination; the very sanctuary of their own Popes they have defiled with blood. […] In the Gunpowder Plot we see them deliberately planning to destroy, at one blow, the nobility and gentry of England. To them we owe those civil wars which for so many years drenched with blood the fair provinces of France. They laid the train of that crowning horror, the St. Bartholomew massacre. Philip II and the Jesuits share between them the guilt of the "Invincible Armada" […]. What a harvest of plots, tumults, seditions, revolutions, torturings, poisonings, assassinations, regicides and massacres, has Christendom reaped from the seed sown by the Jesuits! [Ibid.]

An English Roman Catholic wrote the following in 1602 his preface to the Jesuit Catechism:

To receive Jesuits into a Kingdom is to receive a vermin which at length will gnaw out the heart of the State both spiritual and temporal. They work underhand the ruin of the countries where they dwell, and the murder of whatsoever kings and princes it pleaseth them.

The Abbé Marcel de la Roche Arnauld, after physically escaping from eight years in a Jesuit College, wrote:

[…] how can any honest man live among them? Do you wish to excite trouble, to provoke revolution, to produce the total ruin of your country? Call in the Jesuits. [Jesuit Catechism, 1602, Preface.]

Some of the aspects of Jesuitism which I would like to examine in more detail today are foreshadowed in these quotations.

1. The Jesuits and their aims in historical context

I want to begin by placing the Jesuits in their historical context, because this is essential to understanding their aims and how they intended to achieve them.

The Jesuit Society, or so-called "Society of Jesus", was founded by Ignatius Loyola, a Spanish knight born in 1491, eight years after the birth of Martin Luther. In point of time Loyola's life, which we will not have time to examine here I detail, ran parallel to Luther's, but we can say that in every respect he was the antithesis of Luther. Loyola was a religious fanatic of the Church of Rome and especially an enthusiastic devotee of the Virgin, and on witnessing the rapid spread of the Reformation, he conceived the idea of forming a society of spiritual knights for the purpose of combating it.

Loyola was alarmed by the widespread success of Protestantism throughout Europe – in the German Empire, the Duchy of Bavaria and parts of Austria; in Silesia, Prussia and the Scandinavian countries; in Poland and Bohemia; among the Saxon colonists of Hungary and Transylvania, the Huguenots of France and the Vaudois of northern Italy; in the various cantons of Switzerland; among the hills and glens of Scotland, the growing populations of England, and here in the northern part of this Island. Indeed the Church of Rome, while pretending to dismiss Luther and his Reformation as a mere 'German squabble', was thrown into a state of great panic at the spread of this new religious awakening and the consequent loosening and destruction of the Vatican's previous stranglehold on the Continent, and Loyola's aim in founding the Jesuits was one of the mainstays of the Counter-Reformation.

His "Company of Jesus", as the Jesuit Society was sometimes called, was sanctioned in 1540 by Pope Paul III. The Pope was, of course, willing, at this time of crisis for the Vatican, to use the services of all and any who pledged themselves to fight what they called the new Protestant 'heresy' by whatever means at their disposal. Loyola himself said that he was offering his services to the Pope "for the purposes of fighting against the enemies of the Church", and when the Pope saw the plans for the formalisation of the Jesuit Society as a new monastic order, he is said to have exclaimed: "This is the finger of God." [Quoted from Hans Hillerbrand: The Reformation. A Narrative History related by Contemporary Observers and Participants Ann Arbor, 1989, p. 420.]

The aim of the Jesuits was to inspire and revive an enthusiasm for the Romanism of pre-Reformation times. They were the champions of Popery, selected for the task of counteracting the dawn of light, and of extinguishing it wherever it had burst into flame amongst the European nations, which Rome had for centuries kept immersed in the gloom of spiritual darkness and political bondage. For this reason they took St. Francis and the mediaeval saints as their models, and attempted to restore the authority of the mediaeval church which the Reformers had shattered. We can say that their cornerstone in this endeavour was the absolute surrender of free enquiry and free thought, and total and unquestioning obedience to the supreme ecclesiastical authority of Rome – concepts to which we shall refer later. Hector MacPherson says in his book The Jesuits in History that Loyola, in framing the Constitution of the new Order, "set himself to stop the emancipating process by making more rigorous the despotism of Rome". [Hector MacPherson: The Jesuits in History, London, 1914, p. 9.] Hence the Jesuits sought not only a return to the Romish errors of the Dark Ages, but also to reinforce these with greater rigour than ever.

That, in a word, was Loyola's project, and even before he died in 1556 he had succeeded in founding more than a hundred Jesuit colleges or houses for training Jesuits, and an immense number of educational establishments under their influence. By the time of his death over a thousand Jesuits were actively and aggressively at work all over the world, bent, like their Church, on world-domination. He had divided Europe, India, Africa and Brazil into twelve Jesuit Provinces, in each of which he had his Jesuit officer, two of the most notorious being Francis Xavier (who worked predominantly in Asia where he carried out mass conversions) and Peter Canisius (whose efforts were instrumental in the re-Romanisation of southern Germany). Loyola was the 'general' of all these men – I use the term 'general' deliberately, and later we shall consider the military organisation of the Jesuit Order – and although he still resided in Rome, he soon wielded an influence over the world rivalling that of popes and kings.

Indeed, the very success of the Jesuit Order was the cause of its temporary downfall, for the nations of Europe, after the experience of some generations, found that it was undermining and destroying their national freedom, just as the old ecclesiastical empire of the Roman Church had done prior to the Reformation. So great in fact was the mischief done by the Jesuits, that they were expelled from over 70 countries, four-fifths of which were Roman Catholic, and they were cursed and denounced for their hypocrisy by eleven Popes, though everywhere they have now been reinstated. Protestant Switzerland was the country that acted most decisively against them, and for longest, but even there the ban was lifted only very recently.

The Trinity of Evil: the Council of Trent, the Inquisition and the Jesuits

In fact the Jesuit Order was one of three things in particular which were employed at that time for the same purpose of countering the Reformation, of checking the advance of Protestantism, and it must be understood in relation to the other two. These were the Council of Trent (which met, intermittently, for almost two decades between 1545 and 1563) and the third variety of the Inquisition (authorised by Paul III in a Papal Bull in 1542 – the two previous varieties having been mediaeval Inquisition of Gregory IX in 1231 and the Spanish Inquisition of Sixtus IV in 1478). Perhaps the most important result of the Council of Trent, which was originally supposed to carry out reforms, was the re-stressing of the validity and authority of unwritten traditions in opposition to Luther's doctrine of the Holy Scripture alone (sola scriptura). As for the Inquisition, its leading principle was that, in its own words, "to heretics and especially to Calvinists no toleration must be granted". It is important to recognise that the re-instatement of the Inquisition in the sixteenth century was spearheaded by the Jesuits, as were its atrocities; and it is estimated that in that century alone no less than 900,000 Protestant martyrs laid down their lives for Christ.

Hence we can say that the Council of Trent was the theoretical reaffirmation of the Romanist doctrines exposed as false by the Reformers; the Inquisition was the court set up to judge and punish those who refused to comply with that ecclesiastical ruling; and the Jesuits were both the self-appointed henchmen of that court and the missionaries sent out to propagate and enforce its fallacies world-wide by whatever means lay at their disposal. Hans Hillerbrand puts it very well in his book The Reformation, where he suggests a comparison between the Jesuits and the Nazi brownshirts of the Hitler era:

The Jesuits were the feared and formibible storm-troops of the Counter Reformation. Though their major influence came in the late sixteenth and throughout the seventeenth century, after the period customarily described as the Reformation, their significance even at mid-century was great. The zeal and conviction of the Jesuits were so appropriate to the problem the Catholic Church was facing that something would have been 'missing' in the Counter Reformation had there been no Jesuit order. [Hans Hillerbrand: The Reformation. A Narrative History related by Contemporary Observers and Participants Ann Arbor, 1989, p. 420.]

Apart from this blatantly overt role, the Jesuits have also been crucial to the Papacy through their secret, underhand, conspiratorial, behind-the-scenes activities. The Pope still has thousands of secret agents worldwide, many of them holding high political, commercial and military positions even in nominally Protestant countries. In fact the Vatican has its own Intelligence Service, which includes Jesuits, the Knights of Columbus, the Knights of Malta, Opus Dei, and others.

2. Methods employed by the Jesuits

If we were to believe the claims of the Jesuits in their own writings, we would be deceived into thinking that their primary purpose was to follow the teaching and example of Jesus (as their name falsely implies), to preach the Gospel, to bring about the salvation of humanity, to perform charitable works, and so on; but we are reminded of the falsehood of such claims by the fact that in almost every language the term 'Jesuitical' came to imply deceit, duplicity, craftiness and cunning. Nearly every dictionary that Rome has not succeeded in influencing or censoring includes this second, but more accurate, definition of a Jesuit as 'one given to subtle casuistry'. How often has it been said of certain of our politicians: "He's a Jesuit!" meaning that they were the very antithesis of men who preach and practise godliness and truthfulness! The real aim of the Jesuits is stated in no uncertain terms by the German historian Griesinger in his book History of the Jesuits, and it is "to attain universal dominion for themselves". For this purpose, Griesinger says, they adopted the following methods:

First: to acquire the education of youth, especially the sons of the nobility, and this, on account of their talents and learning, they were most successful in doing. Second: to become the confessors of all persons in power and authority, which enabled them, from their profound knowledge of human passions and weaknesses, to obtain complete influence over these persons, and through them to direct all affairs of the State. Third: the acquirement of wealth, partly by trade […], and partly by inducing the superstitious to leave their properties to them at their death. By these means, although the individual Jesuit took the vow of poverty, the riches of the Society were enormous. Fourth: Their object was the complete destruction of Protestantism and extermination of all Protestants as being the most formidable opponents to their dominion. To attain this end they never ceased to urge Catholics and Catholic princes to wage war against Protestants, and to destroy them by fire, sword and wholesale massacres. In Protestant countries, where they had little influence, their plan was to adopt disguises, especially that of Protestant ministers, in order gradually to pervert the religion of the people and as far as possible direct the policy of the State. In the case of those kings or statesmen, whether Catholic or not, who were hostile to or stood in the way of their designs, they made use of two weapons to remove them from their paths, viz. calumny and assassination; that is to say, falsehood and murder, the special weapons and characteristics of the Prince of Evil. By no one else in the world was the art of calumination practised on such a colossal scale as well as artificial perversion. Where such arts as these failed them they had recourse to violence. [Griesinger: History of the Jesuits, London, 1903, pp. 46ff.]

Griesinger says a lot here about Jesuit tactics, and I want to consider just a few of the major ones in more detail shortly, but first it is important to recognise that these tactics were always executed through indoctrination conducted on the principle of blind obedience to authoritarianism and on the basis of strict military-style training. It is not for nothing, therefore, that the Jesuits are often termed the storm-troopers of Rome, because this attitude was the main distinguishing feature of the Jesuit Order when compared with most other Romanist orders, which tended to be inward-looking, contemplative or mystical.

Military tactics

Remember that Loyola himself had a military training as a soldier in the Spanish army. Spain at that time claimed to be fighting for the Cross against the Moorish 'Infidels'. After he was wounded in 1521 he fell into a delirious fever in which he had visions of the Virgin and claimed that he had received a divine commission to pursue a new plan – to become a general in an army of saints instead of an army of soldiers. Importantly, his creed in this allegedly spiritual mission to destroy the enemies of the Church was to be the soldier's creed: as Seebohm puts it in his book The Epoch of the Protestant Reformation, Loyola "perfected his plan – a soldier's plan – to found a religious army, perfect in discipline, in every soldier of which should be absolute devotion to one end, absolute obedience to his superior, with no human ties to hinder and no objects to divert him from the service required". [F. Seebohm: The Epoch of the Protestant Reformation, London, 1877, p. 204.]

In fact, the best known of Loyola's own letters to his recruits deals with this theme of militaristic obedience. The key statements include: "[…] train yourselves to recognise Christ our Lord in any superior, and with all devotion reverence and obey His Divine Majesty in him"; again: "[…] try to make the surrender of your wills entire. […] perfect it in conforming your will with […] the divine will, the interpreter of which is the superior who governs you in place of God"; again: "[…] proceed blindly, without inquiry of any kind, to the carrying out of the command, with a kind of passion to obey". [Letters of St. Ignatius of Loyola, MI IV, No. 3304, March 26, 1553.] It almost sounds like a clone or mimic of the familiar Vatican system and hierarchy itself, and it is interesting to note that the Jesuits often actually came into conflict with the Pope. Indeed at times there seems to have been quite a lot of mutual jealousy. "One astonishing feature of the Jesuit Order," says MacPherson [op. cit., p. 17], "is that not only is its Constitution essentially despotic, but it has at various times encroached upon the despotic power of the Pope."

It is not for nothing, therefore, that the Head of the Jesuits is often referred to as the 'Black Pope' and considered to be a sort of rival of the Pope. Alexander Robertson says:

The General of the Jesuits, the 'Black Pope', is the real and only Pope. The one who bears the title is but a figurehead. It is the Jesuits' policy he pursues, their voice that speaks through him, their hand that guides him. [Alexander Robertson: The Roman Catholic Church in Italy, London, 1903, p. 51f.]

Although the Jesuits implicitly profess obedience to the Pope, history shows that any Pope who opposed them was quickly eliminated. Clement XIV (1769-1774), for instance, tried to suppress the Jesuit Order in 1773, and while signing the Bull he remarked: "I am signing my death warrant." Shortly afterwards he was poisoned and died in great torment. The same thing had already occurred when Sixtus V (1585-1590) attempted to reform the Jesuit Society in 1590. Orders were given by the Jesuits that litanies should be offered up in all Jesuit churches, so that the Pope's decree should be prevented from taking effect, and, lo and behold, the Pope promptly kicked the bucket (which was probably overflowing with indulgence money)! Hence the well-known Italian proverb: "When the Order of Jesus gives out a litany the holy Chair will become vacant."

Another interesting thing about Clement's Bull of 1773, which was pronounced ex cathedra by his "infallible" Holiness, is that it declared itself to be "for ever […] effective; […] nor shall its meaning ever be rescinded, glossed or explained away"; and yet, in 1815, just seventy years after the Jesuits poisoned Clement, Pius VII (1800-1823) issued another Bull restoring the Jesuits and reversing the Bull of Clement – so which of these professing 'Vicars of Christ' was 'infallible'?!

Jesuit 'casuistry' and 'equivocation'

Now the whole system of Jesuit methodology and tactics is so complex that it is impossible to describe it comprehensively in the time allotted to me, but I want to mention at least a few of the major concepts, and perhaps the best known of these is Jesuit 'casuistry'. Dictionaries usually define it as a form of 'specious or excessively subtle reasoning intended to rationalise or mislead'. It includes the characteristically Jesuit pattern of lies and double-talk, accompanied by infiltration and destabilisation with the ultimate aim of the destruction of all opponents. We have seen examples of it recently in the language of the Good Friday Agreement and the subsequent interpretation of it and reaction to it, as well as the practical side of it on the Garvaghy Road, and we will do well to note that in both of these matters Jesuits have been intensively involved.

The fruits of Jesuit casuistry are well summed up by the eminent British historian Thomas Carlyle (1795-1881), who declared: "Jesuitism has poisoned the wellsprings of truth in the whole world." [Quoted in L.H. Lehmann: The Secret of Catholic Power, New York, undated, p. 14.] Neither the word 'Jesuitism' nor the phenomenon itself, Carlyle tells us, has any prototype in Nature before the founding of the Jesuit Order. He goes on to say that Jesuitism and all that it represents constituted a new perversion in matters of truth and morals – that among all the evils that preceded it none was so subtle, so perfectly organised, so all-pervasive. He tells us that its great secret is that it corrupts, and therefore controls, truth and morals, not only among Roman Catholics, but also in the non-Roman Catholic population of a country and of the world at large. So says Carlyle in his inaugural address of 1886 on being installed as Rector of the University of Edinburgh. Can you imagine the Chancellor of the Queen's University of Belfast, George Mitchell, saying that – this man who has himself been instrumental in a Jesuit plot to destroy Ulster, a plot hatched in the Clonard Monastery and facilitated by 'Father' Oliver Crilly, S.J.?

Lehmann, in his book The Secret of Catholic Power, goes so far as to claim that Jesuit casuistry largely influences legal and business affairs in the modern world, and that it is now wholly identified with Roman Catholic moral theology. It is, he writes,

the creation of passionate Jesuits with the fire of the Inquisition still in their veins. Their aim was to find a way to counteract the new moral system of the Protestant Reformation that supplanted the old system of Catholic laxity and moral corruption that had prevailed […] up till then. If the power of the Roman Catholic Church was to be sustained in the post-Reformation world, it was necessary for them to find a formula of morality as equally convenient as the old one, but so subtle and intricate that its laxity would not show through. [Lehmann: op.cit., p. 14.]

The Encyclopaedia Britannica finds it significant that the casuists were drawn almost exclusively from Italy and Spain, the two countries least alive to the spirit of the Reformation; and that

most of them were Jesuits, the Order that set out to be nothing that Protestantism was, and everything that Protestantism was not. On the other hand, they would certainly lose their hold on the laity, unless some sort of change were made; for many of the Church's rules were obsolete, and others far too severe to impose on the France of Montaigne or even the Spain of Cervantes. Thus caught between two fires the casuists developed a slightly ingenious method for eviscerating the substance of a rule while leaving its shadow carefully intact. [Vol. 5, p. 486.]

Translated into everyday language, Jesuit casuistry might thus be described simply as the art of the most cunningly-disguised double-talk.

It is closely related to 'equivocation' – the practice of speaking the truth to oneself while lying to everybody else. The Jesuit moralist Filliucci (1566-1622) explains equivocation as follows: "When we begin, for instance, to say 'I swear', we must insert, in a subdued tone, the mental reservation 'that today' – and then conclude aloud, 'I have not eaten such a thing' […], for thus the whole speech is most true." [Quoted in A. Cook and W.S. Martin: The Story of the Light that never went out, London, 1903, p. 380.]

Jesuit 'probabilism' and 'intentionalism'

Transferred into the realm of sin and morals, this tactic resulted in the famous Jesuit theory of 'probabilism', first taught in Spain about 1580. It allowed the priest in the confessional to forgive any or all sins, regardless of the sincerity of the penitent, and it also permitted the principle of allowing one evil in order to prevent a greater one – in other words, the idea that the end justifies the means, that a man may commit any wickedness if his intention is directed to a 'good' goal. This is sometimes also termed 'intentionalism'. The historian John Addington Symonds gives a keen analysis of this subtle and hypocritical process by which the Jesuits are able in the confessional to dissolve concrete sins and promote moral laxity, while at the same time glorifying abstract virtue in the pulpit. In his book Catholic Reaction Symonds writes – and it is so significant that I quote it at length:

It was the Jesuit Order's aim to control the conscience by direction and confession, and especially the consciences of princes, women, and youths in high position. To do so by plain speaking and honest dealing was clearly dangerous. The world had had enough of Dominican austerity. […] Make no show of compromise with evil in the gross; but refine away the evil by distinctions, reservations, hypothetical conditions, until it disappears. Explain how hard it is to know whether a sin is venial or mortal, and how many chances there are against its being in any strict sense a sin at all. Do not leave people to their own blunt sense of right and wrong, but let them admire the finer edge of your scalpel, while you shed up morsels they can hardly see. A ready way may thus be opened for the satisfaction of every human desire without falling into theological sins. […] The advantages are manifest. You will be able to absolve with a clear conscience. Your penitent will abound in gratitude […] and be held secure.

"It was thus, Symonds concludes, "that the Jesuit labyrinth of casuistry, with its windings, secret chambers, whispering galleries, blind alleys, escape passages, came into existence." [J.A. Symonds: Renaissance in Italy = Catholic Reaction, Vol. VI, Part 1, no date, p. 223.]

If you want a good description of Jesuit philosophy and tactics, read Constantine Labarum's book Paganry, Popery, Pillage. He speaks of

the unscrupulous duplicity advocated and taught by them, their vicious doctrines of probabilism, mental reservation, amphibologia (double sensed words), justification of the means by the end, and many other maxims subversive of honesty and morality. The utter abnegation of integrity and truth is by this society carried to the farthest conceivable point. It approves of, at least palliates murder of any one who opposes their objects. [London, undated, p. 219.]

In this regard we could mention, for example, the murder of Henry III and Henry IV of France, of William of Orange, the more than twenty-five attempts on the life of Queen Elizabeth I, and a great number of other assassinations and attempted assassinations.

3. The political legacy of the Jesuits

Let us recall at least part of the legacy of the Jesuits as history and historians have recorded it – a legacy marked by sedition, conspiracy, incitement to rebellion, warmongering even in times of peace, and cold, calculated murder. Here is just a selection of the Jesuits' achievements from their foundation to the present. For the sake of simplicity I am going to proceed in chronological order, and I have to limit myself to their tactics directed against Britain.

Remember, in considering this legacy, that Loyola had said: "The chief aim of all our efforts ought to be to procure the confidence and favour of princes and men in places of distinction, to the end that no one might dare to offer opposition to us, but, on the contrary, that all should be subject to us." [Letters, op. cit.] Hence the Jesuits aimed first and foremost at the destruction of the Monarch. Remember, too, that they were very actively involved in politics and made it their main object to check the progress of Reformation ideas in the Courts of Europe. Hence they also aimed at the destruction of the legal system. Remember, further, that in this the confessional and calumny were to be their chief weapons. Hence they both gained immediate access to the private lives of all and sundry and attempted to gain control of the press.

The Jesuits in Britain

Example 1 – The Armada Plot

In Britain, prior to the accession of Elizabeth I in 1558, there is no evidence of the presence of Jesuits, but they soon began to infiltrate the Kingdom during her reign. Their tactics were, first, to corrupt as many Protestant clergy as possible. Then they stirred up sedition and rebellion and circulated scurrilous libels against the Queen in order to alienate English Roman Catholics. These emissaries were received and concealed by disaffected Papists. At the same time, they made various attempts to assassinate the Queen, using fanatics whom they had imbued with hatred of her. Among these were Arden, Somerville, Parry, Throgmorton and Babington. All their attempts, however, were discovered and frustrated by Divine providence. All this activity was designed as the preparatory stage for the attempted invasion of England by the Spanish Armada in 1588, in which the Jesuits were actively and directly involved. The invasion had been planned for three years and was exhorted by the Pope who issued a bull of excommunication against Elizabeth, calling her "an heretic and a favourer of heretics". It was designed to destroy British liberty and Protestantism. It was to be aided by a general rising of Roman Catholics, and when the Queen had been deposed, the intention was to place the Romanist Mary Queen of Scots upon the Throne. These plots were all suppressed or discovered in time by the vigilance of the Queen's Protestant advisers.

Listen to what Thomas Graves Law says about the Armada plot in his book Jesuits and Seculars:

Allen and Parsons, the respective heads of the two missionary bodies, Secular and Jesuit, were the soul of the new enterprise. When Philip procrastinated, and the Pope was cautiously counting the cost, it was these men who passionately goaded them to war, drew up plans of campaign, armed the Catholics in England who would fly to the foreign standard, promised much aid from the priests, and assured the invaders of success. The foreign princes seemed to depend for their information far more upon the reports of the Jesuits than upon those of their ambassadors. [Quoted in Hector MacPherson: op.cit., p. 46f.]

Similar conspiracies and plots formed by the Scottish Jesuits were also defeated by the aid of the strong Protestantism which John Knox had succeeded in implanting there. Lack of time and space prevents me from dealing with them.

Example 2 – the Gunpowder Plot

Then there was the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, in which the principal conspirator was a Jesuit called Garnet; but there were other Jesuits with him, and at the trial of the conspirators, the celebrated Lawyer Sir Edward Coke, said:

I never knew a treason without a Romish Priest, but in this there are very many Jesuits who are known to have dealt and passed through the whole action: Garnet, the superintendent of the Jesuits in England, Cresswell in Spain, Baldwin in Flanders, Parsons at Rome. So the principal offenders are the seducing Jesuits: men that use the most sacred and blessed name of Jesus as a mantle to cover their impiety, blasphemy, treason, rebellion, and all manner of wickedness. [Quoted in "Vigilant": Revolution: Britain's Peril and her Secret Foes, London, undated, p. 16.]

Goldwin Smith points out that the Jesuit Garnet, when caught, actually "had the Jesuit treatise on equivocation in his hands". [Quoted in Hector MacPherson: op.cit., p. 52.]

Example 3 – The dirty deeds of Archbishop Laud

In 1633 William Laud became Archbishop of Canterbury. Not only did he persecute the Puritans, but he also made every effort to Romanise the English Church. He was a pupil of Buckridge, who had been trained by Cheney, both of whom were Romanists and close friends of the Jesuits, and according to several writers probably Jesuits themselves. From the time when Laud attained power, he showed the greatest favour to all Romish priests. He was assisted by his friend Windebank, whom he had got appointed as Secretary of State. Together they perpetrated the greatest cruelty against Protestants who dared to support the doctrines of the Reformation. One prominent Protestant, Prynne, had his ears twice cut off; then the stumps of his ears were dug out. Others, like Leighton, were flogged, their noses were slit in public, and their faces were branded with hot irons.

Since Laud conformed strictly with all the methods of the Jesuits, he also exercised the greatest tyranny over the Press. He suppressed or destroyed any publication which in any way advocated Protestantism. He placed Papists in the office of "searchers" at Dover, a post which had been established in the reign of Elizabeth for the purpose of actually preventing the landing of Jesuits in England. By this means, Laud actually ensured the free entry of Jesuits into the Kingdom through the very means originally designed to keep them out. At the same time he proceeded with such severity against the persons employed by Parliament throughout the country to detect disguised Jesuits, that these watchmen dared not perform their office.

Laud had a close friend who was a Jesuit of great influence – a man by the name of Sir Toby Mathew. His services to Rome were fully recognised by the Pope, who twice offered him a cardinal's hat. Whether Laud was an actual Jesuit or not, it is evident that he was affiliated to them, and was acting under their advice and carrying out their principles.

Example 4 – The Jesuits as instigators of the Irish Rebellions

There is absolute proof that the Jesuits were behind the awful massacre of Protestants in 1641 by Phelim O'Neill, when the aim of extermination of all Protestants and every trace of British influence became a contagious disease. The index finger of the "Holy" Roman Church pointed the way; the Jesuits and their delegates did the rest. Hector MacPherson, in his book The Jesuits in History, mentions the important facts that before the Rebellion began the policy of seizing land had been abandoned since Mary's day, that the religious question had hardly any practical existence, and there was in fact no religious persecution of Roman Catholics. Even the noted Roman Catholic writer Dr. O'Connor states that "this rebellion […] was started at a time of profound peace" and that down to that moment

"Ireland had never experienced since the twelfth century such a calm; never was there less provocation to rebellion. […] We must be content to lay the rebellion and all its violations of faith and perjuries which attended it to the conduct and principles of the foreign-influenced intriguers who argued that Ireland was in the temporals of the Holy See." [Quoted in MacPherson: op. cit., p. 77.]

Who were these "intriguers"? The Jesuits, of course! History records that in response to a petition from O'Neill in 1599 relating to the small matter of a disputed succession to an Irish Earldom, the Pope sent a number of Jesuits to Ireland to seize an opportunity for inflaming the religious passions of Irish Romanists. Annoyed at this failure, they were in 1641 once more at their old game of stirring up religious strife against Protestant England in the interests of the Papacy. Also, as MacPherson says: "Foiled in his effort to depose Elizabeth, the Pope turned his attention to Ireland as a base of operations for his designs upon England." The real question was: Who was to be the ruler of Ireland – Queen Elizabeth or the Pope? [MacPherson: op. cit., p. 77.] A Roman Catholic priest by the name of Bourke, writing in 1641, admits that the Rebellion of 1641 was "begun solely in the interests of the Catholic and Roman religion". [MacPherson: op. cit., p. 77.]

Sir Phelim O'Neill paid for his murders on the scaffold. This was the real reason why Cromwell was brought to Ireland, and why King William later came to deliver our forefathers, so do not believe the Romanist and Jesuit lie. Oliver Cromwell, who was Lord Protector from 1653 till 1658, took severe measures to clear the country of Jesuits, but they were concealed and aided by many of the Roman Catholic gentry.

Example 5 – The Jesuits and the Stuarts

During the reign of Charles II (1660-1685) the Jesuits attained considerable power. In fact, their power was still greater in the short reign of Charles I's second son, James II (1685-1688), who was a bigoted Roman Catholic, and had a Jesuit called Petre as his confessor. What the English had to expect from his advice was revealed in a letter to Petre from La Chaise, the Jesuit confessor of the French King Louis XIV. After saying that by the dragonades in France he had "converted more heretics than Christ and the Apostles could do in ten years", he continued:

"Your heretics [that is, British heretics] are too strong […], and we must seek to convert them by fair means before we fall upon them with fire, swords, halters, gaols, and other like punishments. Lastly, surprise the heretics and let zealous Catholics sacrifice them all and wash their hands in their blood, which will be an acceptable offering to God." [Quoted in The Protestant Echo, op. cit.]

In pursuance of this policy James II first dismissed all Protestant nobles from the Council Chambers and Protestant judges from the Bench, filled the army with Roman Catholic officers, and nominated Roman Catholics in droves to the ecclesiastical benefices and to all the offices of the State. All elections of magistrates and town councils were prohibited, and their offices were filled by Papists, and all the laws against Roman Catholics and the Roman Catholic religion were repealed.

By these means the Protestants, although they now comprised the larger portion of the population, were reduced to a state of servitude, and after the failure of the Protestant rising under the Duke of Monmouth, which was suppressed with cruel severity, the Protestant cause seemed nearly hopeless. Help, however, came from Holland, whose heroic contest against Philip II and Alva had been supported by English money and volunteers. At the invitation of the leading English Protestants, William of Orange came with an army to their assistance, and James and the Jesuits were forced to flee.

From that time the laws against the Jesuits were strictly enforced, and they were rendered the more effectual from the fact that the English people had had such experience of the dangerous malevolence of the Jesuits that they were hated and feared throughout the country. The claws of the beast were cut, but they soon began to grow again.

The Jesuits and the two World Wars

It is a sad fact that Britain has never finally learnt the lessons of her history, and it is a measure of her forgetfulness and folly that in 1793 she granted Roman Catholics the franchise in contravention of the Williamite Revolution Settlement. Predictably, they proceeded to gain access to Parliament and to establish themselves in positions of power, denying their subversive intentions behind a cloak of emancipation or, more recently, one of civil rights. Ever since then, Rome, with the help of the Jesuits, has been trying to subvert the Protestant Throne directly in a country where Roman Catholics represent a very small minority of the population.

An even greater folly, however, was the Bill of 1899 to legalise the Jesuits in Britain; for it can be proved beyond any doubt that this gave them the freedom to spearhead the assault against this country in both World Wars. The propaganda that they spread ensured the return, in 1906, of a large number of Members of Parliament hostile to the British Empire and advocates of the revolutionary policies of the Jesuits. The author of the book Revolution: Britain's Peril and her Secret Foes, traces the primary cause of World War I to "the falsehoods and slanders invented by the Jesuits to excite the hatred of the Continent against us" and "their special efforts to inflame Germany with the hatred which is their particular weapon for the destruction of their opponents". [Op. cit., p. 16.] If you want first-hand evidence of this, read the Memoirs of the German Kaiser Wilhelm, where he tells of his visit to the Jesuits' great friend, Pope Pius X (1903-14). Here are the Kaiser's own words:

[…] the Pope said to me on this occasion that Germany must become the sword of the Catholic Church. I remarked to him that the old Roman Empire of the German nation no longer existed; but he stuck to his words. [The Kaiser's Memoirs, by Wilhelm II, translated by Thomas R. Ybarra, New York, 1922, p. 221.]

Then in the years preceding World War II in Germany, it was the Jesuit Party that was instrumental in tying up the Vatican's policy to that of Hitler. In a sense it 'facisticised' the Roman Catholic Church in Germany and made it the willing collaborator with Nazism. W.M. Montano states in his book Vatican Policy and World Affairs:

There is now no doubt that the idea of 'totalitarianising' the entire body of a nation by the ruthless intolerance of a controlling organism within the greater organisation was taken from the Jesuit set-up in the Catholic Church. [London, undated, passim.]

Let me quote you the following irrefutable proof, translated from Hitler's Mein Kampf, that this madman both admired and modelled his tactics on the Jesuits:

Above all, I have learned from the Jesuits. And so did Lenin too, as far as I recall. The world has never known anything quite so splendid as the hierarchical structure of the Catholic Church. There were quite a few things that I simply appropriated from the Jesuits for the use of the Party. [Adolf Hitler: Mein Kampf, p. 478; see also pp. 485, 487, 882.]

The Concordat that Hitler signed with the Vatican in 1933 bore the signatures of chief negotiator Cardinal Pacelli (who became Pius XII, 1939-1958) and Hitler's Deputy (Vice-Chancellor of the Reich) Franz von Papen, who was a leading Roman Catholic. In a German newspaper called the Völkischer Beobachter of January 14, 1934, von Papen wrote the following: "The Third Reich is the first power which not only recognises, but puts into practice, the high principles of the Papacy." What is this if it is not an unambiguous statement that the Nazi régime used the Roman Catholic system as a model?

4. Conclusion

Let me conclude with a most solemn warning. Jesuitry is like a blighting cancer which infects and corrupts all who are foolish enough to associate with it. We have mentioned the testimony of some leading writers and historians as to its results. To imagine that today it has become respectable, or that its aims or influence have changed, is a fatal mistake. The Bible warns against wolves in sheep's clothing. On February 21 last year I was listening to the radio programme Sunday Sequence, and the announcer said that some woman had phoned in to say she wanted "to thank the Jesuits for putting prayers on the Internet". What a pathetic dupe! – or was she simply a stooge?

The whole system of Jesuitism remains unchanged today and is well summed up in the words chosen by the French Parliament as the inscription on a column erected in Paris in commemoration of the Jesuit plot against the life of King Henry IV. It declares the plot to have "sprung from the pestilent heresy of that pernicious sect the Jesuits, who, concealing the most abominable crimes under the guise of piety, had publicly taught the assassination of Kings […]". [Quoted in Anon.: The Secret Instructions of the Jesuits, London, 1824, p. viii.]

The duty of Christians is clear: it is to expose the Jesuits and to pray for their destruction. Queen Mary is reported to have said that she feared the prayers of John Knox more than an army of 20,000 men. Prayer is a never-failing weapon against the secret attacks of the ambushed enemy. The Jesuit cannot hide from God: there is no counsel against the Lord through cunning, duplicity, immorality or bloodthirstiness. The Jesuit is the fanatical promoter of a lying, murderous, blasphemous system which has sullied the pages of history with its diabolism. Its seat is at the Vatican and it is the greatest enemy of the Gospel and of humanity that the Devil has ever loosed on earth.

Back to Top

Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu

Menu Items
- Start Page · Search - Rome In the News - Answers (Q&A) - Audio Sermons - Photo Gallery - Our Guestbook 
- Errors of Rome - Caustic Comments - History Lessons - Rome & Politics - Contemporary - Sword (Bible) 
- How To Witness - EIPS Lectures - Feature Articles - EIPS Courses 
Site best viewed with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 in 800x600 resolution.
© 1999 Ian Paisley. All rights reserved.