Where Did The Attack Go?

 

To My Readers: This week my guest poster, Dominic Caggeso, takes an incredible look at the papacy and what happened at Vatican II. Feel free to comment as usual. If you have a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week. 

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

Where Did The Attack Go?

by Dominic Caggeso

A skilled detective uses clues to unravel a mystery. Fingerprints, footprints, suspicious marks on the wall, and other subtle indications are meticulously examined by the investigator’s keen mind to reconstruct the sequence of events and reveal the criminal. Similarly, Traditional Catholics have spent decades piecing together an increasingly comprehensive body of evidence to explain the greatest crime of all time: the Second Vatican Council. Who were the perpetrators? What were their motives? How did they execute their plan? How much was premeditated?

 Over the years, determined and tireless Catholics have answered these and many other questions in great detail. The crime scene has been thoroughly investigated, the police report written and submitted, the court convened, and the verdict delivered: Guilty, guilty! Communists, Modernists, Freemasons, and other enemies of the Church have orchestrated a silent coup in the heart of Rome. The evidence is abundant, the motives publicly declared by the perpetrators, and more proof emerges daily with each new heresy or blasphemy from the apostate Vatican.

Having refined and polished the evidence of this monumental crime, some of us strive to repackage it in hopes of convincing those unfortunate victims still ensnared in the Novus Ordo. Just as an abused child may grow up to repeat his father’s crimes, those trapped in the Novus Ordo, victims of the Modernists’ lies and deceit, often become proponents of the same vile heresies. A clear and compelling case against Vatican II, supported by well researched and documented evidence, can sometimes effectively free the minds of those still caught in the web of deceit spun by the Vatican II sect. I know this from personal experience. 

When I became conflicted about the Novus Ordo, I sought answers. Prepackaged and well-formulated arguments, supported by evidence and logic, were a lifeline that helped me escape the Vatican II trap into which I was born. I am grateful to all the Traditional Catholic detectives who have tirelessly and meticulously pieced together the trail of clues, assembled theological arguments, and presented their findings in the public forum, where they could be discovered by Catholics like myself, searching for answers.

In my desire to contribute to this body of soul-saving work, I aim to present further evidence highlighting the nefarious nature of the Second Vatican Council and its aftermath. Rather than offering positive proof, such as the presence of condemned errors in the Council’s documents or the warnings about Modernism issued by Pope St. Pius X, I intend to present negative proof—something that should be present but is conspicuously absent. Following the Second Vatican Council, the external attacks on the Holy See suddenly ceased. These assaults on the papacy had been intensifying for centuries, reaching a fever pitch. By the late 1800s, they had escalated into a fierce political, military, and public relations war waged by the Church’s enemies. Then, in the mid-twentieth century, the attacks abruptly ended.

Initial Opposition

Throughout Church history, the papacy has rarely enjoyed a sustained period without facing opposition. During the Middle Ages, various kings and emperors, themselves Catholics, objected to the pope’s temporal power within their kingdoms. Armies marched across Christendom, and high-stakes political intrigues unfolded, all vying for more land and wealth in the great chessboard of medieval Christendom. However, these opponents of papal power were always Catholic. They did not oppose the papacy in principle but rather Its claims to certain temporal powers that extended into their realms.

In the latter Middle Ages, the Avignon Papacy and the subsequent Papal Schism caused significant scandal and confusion among Catholics throughout Christendom. The reputation of the papacy was tarnished, creating space in the public forum for open disagreement and criticism of this sublime office. During this time, the heresy of Conciliarism emerged, seeking to diminish the authority of the papacy by placing it on par with or subordinate to a council’s dictates. The attack on the core tenets of papal authority had begun!

The damage inflicted by the Avignon Papacy and the Papal Schism was further compounded during the Renaissance, which only served to diminish the papacy’s reputation and authority in the minds of Catholics, especially in Northern Christendom. The luxuries and extravagances of the Renaissance left a sour impression, later exploited by Martin Luther. Over centuries, attitudes towards the papacy gradually shifted, and princes and kings were now ready to follow Luther’s lead, openly defying and repudiating the papacy, the Church, and the Faith. From this point forward, enemies of the papacy and the Church could now be found within the confines of Christendom as opposed to existing in foreign lands or distant realms.

Within a century and a half, the Protestant Revolt morphed and diffused. In Protestant lands, heretics opposed each other as they sought new and creative ways to gain a following. This disintegration eroded basic and foundational principles such as authority and Truth, principles that had been taken for granted by Christendom during the Middle Ages. Meanwhile, in Catholic lands, the papacy and the Church maintained the hierarchy established by Christ, preserving the ancient system that had characterized the Catholic Church for centuries. The proximity of Protestant heretics to Catholic kingdoms, both contained within the boundaries of Europe, caused these two divergent paradigms to bristle and chafe. 

Thus, as the Protestant Revolt morphed into the misnamed “Age of Enlightenment,” the papacy and the Catholic Church’s ancient structure and authority became targets for criticism and philosophical and ideological deconstruction.

Increasing Opposition

The misnamed “Age of Enlightenment” was extremely dangerous. The Protestant Revolt had seduced Christians into believing they could discover and assert theological truths without reference to the Catholic Church. Building on this foundation, the “Age of Enlightenment” took the next logical step, seeking to discover and assert philosophical truths without relation to God. Human Reason was elevated to a god-like status as European minds sought to reconstruct an ideological framework and belief system upon which they could build a world without God, especially without the Catholic Church. 

For these “enlightened” yet misguided men, religion needed to be subjugated or left completely in the past. Protestantism was not a cohesive unit and thus not a true threat. However, the papacy and the Church, in their minds, were major obstacles to progress.

The “Age of Enlightenment” was the mother of the French Revolution. The mother’s advice and guidance were taken to heart by the child and turned into action. Physical measures were employed by the French Revolution to enforce the ideas of the “Age of Enlightenment.” Napoleon Bonaparte arose from the French Revolution, rolling through Western Europe with the Grand Army of the Republic, dethroning Catholicism wherever he could. Napoleon deposed the last reigning Holy Roman Emperor, Francis II, in 1806. More notably, he also kidnapped two popes who refused to submit to the little man from Corsica. His army charged into Rome and temporarily established the Roman Republic in the heart of the Church’s bosom, from the place of the papal throne. The attack on the papacy was escalating!

Determined Opposition

Napoleon ushered in a new age of republicanism across Europe. Catholic monarchs were weakened or abolished altogether. Throughout the Continent, the enemies of the Church had seized control of government, communications, finances, and military power. However, there still existed a kingdom on the Italian Peninsula that defied this new age of atheism, humanism, secularism, and modern error. The Papal States, a tract of land in central Italy, had been ruled by the papacy since the mid-eighth century and remained a sovereign Catholic kingdom. From here, the papacy continued to speak and act with autonomy, radiating its teachings to Catholics worldwide. This level of freedom was intolerable for the enemies of the Church. The next stage of assault on the papacy was about to begin.

In the late 1800s, Italian Freemasons launched the “Risorgimento,” an effort to unite all the disparate kingdoms and republics in Italy under one king. The Papal States stood directly in the way of their goals, and the authority of the papacy directly challenged and condemned the Freemasons. In 1870, Italian forces stormed into the Papal States and blasted through the Aurelian Walls in Rome, abruptly interrupting and ending the First Vatican Council. From this point onward, the popes refused to leave the Vatican in protest. 

The attack on the papacy had reached a fever pitch. There was little left to attack, as the papacy’s temporal power had been completely stripped away. The papacy’s ability to communicate with the outside world was greatly reduced. Additionally, the public relations apparatus of the pagan state had maligned and calumniated the office of the papacy, making it an object of ridicule.

Finally, in 1929, in the post-Napoleonic Age, when Europe was somewhat swinging back towards the political right, Mussolini signed the Lateran Treaty with the Church. The Holy See obtained modern-day Vatican City, which it would rule with sovereign authority. It had secured a tiny bubble of safety and refuge, but within, the final attack on the papacy and the Church was hiding, like sleeper cells behind enemy lines. In a short time, the Second Vatican Council would be called by the Modernists, and we all know the rest of the story.

Conclusion

After the Second Vatican Council, where did this centuries-old attack on the papacy go? The assault on the Church and the papacy had been growing in scale, malice, and determination since the sixteenth century. By the early twentieth century, the malevolent forces of evil had the papacy cornered. It was checkmate (from a human perspective).

As Sedevacantists, we have the answer to this question. The attack on the Church took on a new and much more sinister character. Instead of attacking from the outside, the enemies of the Church infiltrated. The reason why outward attacks on the papacy ceased in the mid-twentieth century is that the enemies had taken over the Vatican.

One can imagine, if we did still have a pope in Rome, how sophisticated and brutal the attack would be today, given the astonishing developments in technology and the horrific and malignant growth of immorality, vice and all manner of evil. Instead, we see an aligning of interests between the world and the Vatican. Thus, by negative proof, we can arrive at a conclusion that strongly points to sedevacantism.