Plot Against the Church: Part 4 - Maurice Pinay

John Chrysostom and Ambrose Condemn the Jews

The first dissensions to occur within Arianism were apparently produced by the increasingly moderate tendencies of the bishops, who though in error nevertheless acted in good faith; they therefore clashed with the extremists who were undoubtedly controlled by the "Fifth Column."

This gradually weakened the heresy in the Roman Empire.

Upon the death of Julian the army proclaimed General Jovian as Emperor. The latter was a Catholic, so that orthodoxy almost controlled the situation.

The new Emperor summoned Saint Athanasius back out of banishment and appointed him his advisor. Unfortunately and unexpectedly, however, Jovian died the next year and Valentinian I was proclaimed as new Emperor. The latter appointed his brother Valens as Regent for the Eastern part of the Empire. Thus it came about that, while the former allowed religious freedom, Valens, who was a zealous Arian, made efforts to resurrect this heresy at least in the eastern part of the Empire. Meanwhile the heretics used the situation in order to exert influence on the Germanic tribes who threw themselves into the arms of Arianism and thus in the Jew-friendly direction.

Valens unleashed a new persecution of Catholics and once again banished the now aged Saint Athanasius. At the same time he began, as the Catholic historian Theodoretus reports, to grant the Jews and pagans all kinds of guarantees. Also he was not satisfied with persecuting the Christians, but included the moderate Arians, whom he, without wishing it, drove into the arms of Holy Church.

The Jewish historian Graetz agrees in this regard, when he alludes to the fact that Valens was

"Arian and had had to suffer so much from the Catholic party that he now became intolerant towards the latter. He allowed the Jews to enjoy his protection and heaped honours and distinctions upon them."

It is therefore evident that the resurgence of Arianism in the East coincided with the persecutions of Catholicism and with a preferential treatment of Jewry.

With Gratian set in years of deadly struggle between Pagans and Christians. The outcome remained changeable until the Spanish general Theodosius took over the Emperorship both in the east as well as the west.

Theodosius the Great dealt paganism as well as Arianism, which had risen to new life in the east under the protection of Valens, deadly blows and hence provided Catholicism in the Empire with the final victory. It was to be hoped that he would also combat Jewry, but the Hebrews knew how to gain his tolerance at the right hour, under which they wished to extend anew their influence in Roman society. This activity was so dangerous for Holy Church that both the Bishop of Milan, Saint Ambrose, as well as Chrysostom, another of the great Fathers of the Church, saw themselves necessitated to conduct an energetic struggle against the Jews as well as against those Christians who secretly furthered the protection of the Jewish cult. Concerning this struggle, the Israelite historian Graetz, to whom we will hand over at this point, reports:

"On Saturdays and the Jewish festivals, many Christians, especially of the female sex, both women of noble birth as well as those of lowly status, were regularly to be encountered in the synagogues. They listened devoutly to the trumpet call on the day of the Jewish New Year, were at the solemn cult of the Day of Atonement and took part in the celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles. The fact that they performed all this behind the back of the Christian clergy and therefore had to beg their neighbours not to betray them, made the matter still more attractive. Against this spontaneous honouring by Christians of Jewish institutions, Chrysostom directed his violent monkish sermons and used all kinds of harsh expressions against them, by his preaching that the synagogues were disgraceful exhibitions, dens of thieves and even worse."

This great Father of the Church undoubtedly expressed great truths; in fact if he had uttered them in our days, then he would have been condemned as an Antisemite by the Jews as well as by the Christian clergy who play into the latter's hands.

On the other hand one sees from this how widespread even in Rome the core of Christians was who outwardly appeared Christian, but in secret practised the Jewish cult. The Jew Graetz describes to us how these kinds of Christians attended the synagogues behind the back of the Catholic clergy, and how they were concerned that their neighbours did not betray them, if they noticed this most suspicious activity. It is therefore natural that the great Father of the Church, Chrysostom, thundered against these false Christians; for Holy Church had still not created the institution for their combating and prosecution, namely the Holy Office of the Inquisition.

Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, one of the great Saints and illustrious Church Fathers, who exercised such a decisive influence upon the Emperors Gratian and Theodosius I, and to whom belongs thanks for the final triumph of Holy Church in the Roman Empire, was at that time the most restless and most energetic fighter against the "Synagogue of Satan".

Upon different occasions he condemned the Jews and attempted to prevent them gaining control of the Roman Empire. It was also his heart's wish to prevent them being successful in destroying Holy Church; above all when the usurper Maximus temporarily revealed himself to be lord of half the Empire. As Saint Ambrose himself provides evidence, Maximus was a Jew and had attained his crowning as Emperor of Rome by murdering the devout Catholic Gratian.

As was to be expected, Maximus supported anew the Jews and pagans who gathered around him. However, he was fortunately defeated by Theodosius in the year 378, as a result of which the hope of the Jews of this time gaining control of the Imperium of the Caesars vanished.

In order to form an idea of the anti-Jewish zeal and Catholic saintliness that formed the quintessence of Saint Ambrose, we will again allow Graetz, the official and classical historian of Jewry, who enjoys so much prestige and authority with the Hebrews, to speak. With dismay he confirms:

"Ambrose of Milan was a violent official, who had not the slightest inkling of theology. Particularly for this reason, because he was notorious within the Church as violent, he was elevated to the rank of Bishop. . . On a certain occasion, when the Christians of Rome had set on fire a synagogue and the usurper Maximus had ordered that the Senate should rebuild it at state expense, Ambrose called him a Jew. When the Bishop of Callinicus in North Mesopotamia had caused a synagogue there to be burned by monks, Theodosius commanded that it should be erected at his expense, and punished those who had participated in this deed.

"Ambrose broke out into a violent rage over this and, in the letter he sent to the Emperor upon the occasion, used the harshest and most provocative turns of phrase, so that the Monarch saw himself obliged to rescind the command. Ambrose accused the Jews of disregarding and deriding the Roman Laws. In connection with this he abused them by saying that they might not provide either Emperors or governors from their ranks; that they were refused admittance to the army or Senate and they did not even possess the right to sit at table with nobility. The Jews were thus only there to pay high taxes."

Apart from other extremely interesting things, the outstanding Israelite Graetz tells us something which awakens our main interest, namely that Saint Ambrose "on account of his reputation for being violent", was elevated to the dignity of Bishop. Graetz himself confirms his violence with details which prove his energy in combating Jewry. As we will later expressly prove, the honorary offices of the Church during the times of the apogee of Holy Church, as with those in the times of Saint Ambrose, were entrusted to those who defended the Church most zealously and energetically, especially against its principal enemy, Jewry.

This gives an exact explanation for the glorious period of Catholicism in such times. A combative hierarchy, which is conscious of the enemy on the other side, guarantees the possibilities of triumph, whilst a largely non-combative hierarchy, which does not recognise the true danger, coincides exactly with the epochs of weakness and decline of Holy Church.

The epochs of Saint Athanasius and the Arianist triumphs coincide with the unmistakeable fact that the honorary Church offices were bought by indifferent representatives and even by members of the "Fifth Column". The true defenders of the Church were at that time pressed to the wall, disregarded and even persecuted. So it occurred with Athanasius, the great Father of the Church, and with all the bishops and clergy who followed him.

The same occurs in many places in our time. A great number of clergy and religious dignitaries, who have stood out through their adherence to Christ and their energy in the defence of Holy Church, see themselves humiliated and even persecuted through other clerics who provide Communism and Freemasonry with every assistance. Those clergy, who serve the interests of Jewry, strive to purchase the offices of bishops and cardinals when these become vacant, in identical manner as their predecessors in the time of Arius.

This concealed manoeuvre has made possible the Freemasonic and Communist triumphs, so that it already seems as if no one can any longer stop them.

By means of these deceptive tactics, of slandering the good and pressing them to the wall, in order to purchase the honorary Church offices for the wicked, which fortunately has not been successful in many places, although in others far more so, the "Fifth Column" has been able to bring under its control in recent years many positions, which in fact form a minority within the clergy of Holy Church, but have a decisive influence. They form the principal cause why in some lands a more or less considerable part of the Catholic clergy has promoted the revolutionary Freemasonic or Communist movements. As a result the defence of Catholic governments has been completely crippled, or at least the good patriots frustrated, by being robbed of the support of great sectors of Catholicism and being unconsciously driven into the Freemasonic or Communist revolts.

The most recent case of Cuba, in America, speaks volumes in this respect and should be for all the occasion of a deep reaching study and investigation, since it represents a typical example. The Communist and persecutor of the Church, Fidel Castro, was, when he was about to suffer shipwreck, protected by Catholic bishops, and his revolutionary movement was supported by the clerics and bishops with an enthusiasm and zeal which would have been worthy of a better cause. It was this circumstance that in the first place motivated the deeply orthodox Cuban people to commit itself unreservedly to the cause of the Communist leader. Thus the latter carried off a triumph, whose desolating result we all know.

It is understandable that Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan and a great Church leader in his time, was dismayed that Theodosius allowed the Jews to overstep the laws of Rome, which blocked admission for them to the Senate as well as allowing them no admittance to the army and to government positions; for he was conscious of the great harm which they could cause Christianity and the Empire, if they gained control of the government.

A further important fact must be mentioned. The Jews were the initiators and propagandists of the Arian heresy, to which sect many Germanic barbarians from the frontier regions also belonged, of whom the majority, which was an open secret, were inspired by the wish to attack and conquer the Roman Empire. If Saint John Chrysostom had lived in our times, then undoubtedly the Jews and their satellites within Christianity would have thrown against them the accusation of being Nazis and disciples of Hitler, just as they do the same with all zealous Catholics who at present wish to protect the Church from the Jewish threat. The Jew Graetz says, as we have already quoted elsewhere, in reference to the role which both played in that period of open struggle of Holy Church against the Jews: "The chief fanatics against the Jews in that time were John Chrysostom of Antioch and Ambrose of Milan, who attacked the Jews with most extreme violence.

Naturally, before Holy Church was able to carry through its final triumph over the "Synagogue of Satan" and Arianism, it had to withstand such critical moments as in our days. We are given vivid details of this in the letter which was signed by thirty-three of the most well-known bishops. Among these are found the first president of the Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, Saint Meletius of Antioch; the great Church Father Saint Gregory Nazianzen, who presided over the said Ecumenical Council after the death of Meletius; Saint Basil, likewise Father of the Church; and other outstanding personages through their reputation and their holiness. From this letter we quote word for word the following paragraphs:

"The dogmas of religion are distorted and the laws of the Church are turned upside down. The ambition of those who do not fear the Lord reaches out for the honorary offices of the Church, and the office of bishop is offered as prize for the most subtle infamy and in fact with such craft that he who utters the gravest blasphemies is held to be most capable of all for leading the people as bishop. The seriousness of the bishop's office has been lost.

"There is a lack of shepherds, who conscientiously guard the flock of the Lord. The property of the poor is permanently used by the ambitious for their own advantage and used for gifts to aliens. The true following of the Canon has come into forgetfulness. . . concerning all this the unbelievers laugh, and those weak in faith hesitate; the faith itself has become doubted. Uncertainty has poured itself over souls; for those who mocked the word of God in their maliciousness, reflect the true state of affairs, and the voice of the devout is silent."

What finds expression by the aforementioned bishops in this memorable letter can in fact be applied to what occurs at present in some dioceses, even if fortunately not in all. However, there are dioceses, above all such in which the "Fifth Column" predominates, in which the Semitophilic Prelates are at work in perceptible alliance with Freemasonry and Communism to secure themselves in boldest manner the bishop's office, exactly as the Saints quoted reveal. They interfere in the internal affairs of other dioceses, in which devout bishops officiate, and only await their death in order to stretch out their feelers in Rome. By means of deceptive manoeuvres and misrepresentations they strive to buy the successors of the vacant dioceses and in fact not only for the most capable, but for the accomplices of the "Fifth Column". In such a way they trample upon the right of those, who on grounds of their virtue and services should occupy bishop's chairs.

But in that epoch these Saints, who have now been canonised by the Church, managed to save the situation. If they also on their side revealed unnecessary caution and hesitancy, then they nevertheless resolutely opposed the powers of evil and unmasked them publicly. They also pilloried all evil conditions, as we clearly recognise by means of the letter quoted, because as these saintly Church Fathers say, the silence of the Good makes possible the victory of the Evil. As a result of such clear as well as energetic conduct, Holy Church was able to carry off the triumph over Jewry, paganism, Arianism and other heresies.

However, the Saints who saved Catholicism in such different times, had to pass along a painful path of suffering; and in fact not only from the side of Jewry, against which they fought with such resolution, but also from the side of those within the clergy, who consciously or unconsciously served the interests of the Jews. We have already seen that Saint Athanasius was persecuted by the bishops adhering to the heresy of the Jew Arius, as also by the Emperors standing under the heretical influence. Even two Church Councils did not call a halt to this, but these that had actually been summoned for the salvation of Catholicism, transformed themselves, once they were controlled by the Arians and turned against the Orthodoxy, into veritable heretical Councils.

And in order to complete the picture, which shows how those Saints had to suffer, who like Saint Chrysostom opposed Jewry and heresy with energy and resolution, we take over literally what the biographers of the Saints mentioned say. As sources we quote Chrysostom himself as well as the Catholic historians John Cassian, Martirius and others:

"What is most astonishing and incomprehensible for us, as for John Cassian and the obscure eulogist of the 7th century, Martirius, is, that he (Saint John Chrysostom) was not banished or finally condemned to death by a governor of Decius or Diocletian, but by a band of ambitious and ill-willed bishops. . .

"On the other side there were bishops who, while whispering to the weak Arcadius and the raving Eudoxia that John was guilty of insulting their majesty, which meant nothing less than demanding his head, protested that they could not intervene and that the Emperor would in fact know what was to be done in such a case, for which naturally no small punishment existed. And why should one not recall the terrible scenes at Caesarea in Cappadocia, when the Saint, coming from distant Cocusus, trod the soil there. Tired, exhausted and delirious, with high fever, he was almost torn to pieces by a horde, as he called them himself, of wild monks who were incited by the Bishop. And what was worse, they belonged to the protective troop, which should have accompanied the poor banished Saint. And while the people wept and as a result showed that it was better that its shepherds, the envy of the local Bishop mercilessly pursued the outlawed Saint into his refuge, where the magnanimous neighbourly love of a noble woman granted him a roof. And they compelled him to continue his march on a night without moonlight over treacherous mountain paths."

These were the men, who made Christianity great; who allowed Holy Church to triumph, and saved them from the cunning of their outer and inner foes. At present the same type of Catholics, clergy and laymen, are needed in order to save Christianity and the whole of mankind, who are threatened by Communism, Freemasonry and the Synagogue of Satan which has instigated the whole conspiracy.

The high dignitaries of the Church and the worldly political leaders, who fight for the salvation of Catholicism under such difficult conditions, must be prepared to suffer not only all kinds of attacks from the side of the revolutionary forces of Jewry, but also from the side of the descendants of Judas Iscariot. The latter play within the clergy in this or that form the cards of the forces of Satan; and it is they, who through their high and arrogantly usurped struggle within Holy Church can instigate the most violent, destructive and painful attacks against those who fight for the defence of a Catholicism and their gravely threatened nations. May the Lord God provide faith, resolution and strength to them who, in imitation of Christ, take up the cross in order to follow Him in this decisive hour for the fate of the world.