Plot Against the Church: Part 4 - Maurice Pinay

Saints Bernard and Norbert
Free the Church from the Jewish Antipope

In this case divine providence—as promised—came to the aid of the Church and allowed capable men to come forward, who were resolved to sacrifice everything for the salvation of Catholicism. These leaders recognised at the given moment—through the aid of God—the whole extent of the disaster which had occurred and of the approaching catastrophe and flung themselves fully and completely, with selflessness, highest mysticism and great infectious energy into the struggle against the Synagogue and its supporters. Thus Saint Irenaeus appeared when Jewish Gnosticism threatened to split Christianity. In the same way Saint Athanasius, the great anti-Jewish leader appeared when the heresy of the Jew Arius had almost uprooted the Church, and thus appeared later under similar circumstances Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Ambrose of Milan, Saint Cyril of Alexandria, Saint Isidore of Seville, St. Felix and the archbishop Agobardo, Amolon and many others, who all—illuminated by divine grace— mercilessly combated the Jews, the centuries old enemies of Holy Church and also their Fifth Column, their heresies and revolutionary movement.

Who would now come to the aid of the Church, since it passed through perhaps the most difficult crisis since its origin? Who would be the anti-Jewish leaders, whom Christ had chosen in this case for salvation of Holy Church?

As usual, God's help was revealed through the appearance of two great fighters: Saint Bernard, Church scholar and Abbot of Clairveaux, and Saint Norbert, founder of the Order which bears his name, and archbishop of Magdeburg, who was related to the German Imperial family.

When Saint Bernard received news of the disastrous events in Rome, he made the rare decision to give up his peaceful quiet life in a monastery, in order to throw himself into a hard, uncomfortable, sorrowful and dangerous struggle, which in addition was already regarded as lost, since the Jewish Pope, thanks to his gold and the support which he continued to receive, was complete master of the situation. Innocent II on the other hand, forsaken and in flight, was excommunicated by Anacletus, and everything seemed lost for him. According to the opinion of important theologians and historians, he could in addition scarcely make his claims valid, since his election did not correspond to Church Law. Saint Bernard took on this already almost lost cause, because he was convinced that it was a good cause and Holy Church ought not in this manner and way to fall into the hands of its worst enemy, Jewry.

He proceeded from the correct standpoint and concerned himself neither with the majority of the 23 Cardinals who had voted for Anacletus, and the six who chose Innocent, nor with how the election had proceeded. In a letter to the German Emperor Lothar he writes among other things: "It is a disgrace for Christ that a Jew sits on the throne of St. Peter's." With this the Church scholar had struck the sore point and alluded to the seriousness of the situation. For it was simply impossible that a Jew, an enemy of Holy Church, was Pope. In the letter to the Emperor it is stated among other things: "Anacletus has not even a good reputation with his friends, while Innocent is illustrious beyond all doubt."

The Abbot Ernold, a contemporary biographer of Saint Bernard, reports that Pierleoni, as ambassador and cardinal, had collected enormous riches, "and had later robbed the Churches." And when even the bad Christians who followed him refused to destroy the golden chalices and crucifixes in order to melt them down, Anacletus had Jews put this plan into action. The latter destroyed the sacred cups and engravings with enthusiasm. These objects were sold, and thanks to this money Anacletus was—as was reported—in the position of persecuting the supporters of Innocent II. Bishop Hubert of Lucca, Andreas Dandolo, the Doge of Venice, the abbot Anselmo of Grembloux and other chroniclers and historians accuse the Jewish anti-Pope on account of this and other grave crimes.

In this struggle principally the German Emperor, but also the King of France were of greatest importance, for Germany and France were then the most powerful Catholic states. Saint Bernard, supported by his great friend Saint Norbert, used all his power in persuading the two irresolute monarchs to support Innocent. For this purpose he wrote them letters and undertook all possible steps. Louis VI of France could not make up his mind and had a Council called, which, corresponding to his wish, took place in Etampes.

Through his eloquence and his zeal Saint Bernard there attained that the Fathers of the Synod declared for Innocent. He cited the already mentioned grounds and in addition proved that Innocent was the first to be chosen and that this first election would be valid until it was legally annulled, even if later the overwhelming majority of Cardinals had voted for Anacletus. In addition he proved that Innocent had been consecrated as Pope by the competent Cardinal bishop of Ostia. The courage and energy of the heroic Cardinal Aimerico, who had rapidly and secretly buried the dead Pope and thus in somewhat unusual manner hastened the election of Innocent, were now very much of advantage.

Holy Church, Christianity and the whole of mankind must be grateful to this courageous, active Cardinal, and maintain his memory, for with his action he began the struggle for the salvation of Holy Church and thus contributed to the salvation of the whole world. If the Jews had been successful in controlling Christianity eight centuries ago, then the catastrophe would have occurred several centuries earlier, which now threatens the globe in terrible forms. Islam was then also threatened through the network of secret revolutionary organisations of Jews—such as those of the "Batinis" and of the "Murderers"—which wished to control and destroy it.

Innocent II had fled from Italy to France and had now, since the Council of Etampes supported his—(so he believed)—already lost cause, hoped once more. Upon the recognition and support of the Council followed the very valuable, temporal support of the King of France, who from now on became the principal mainstay of the legal Pope against his rival, the anti-Pope, as the Synod then described the latter. The French monarch followed the guiding principles of Saint Bernard, and there were no further discussions concerning which of the two elected Popes was the legally justified, but which was the more worthy—as the famous Abbot Suger of Saint Denis, expressed it.

In the face of the overwhelming activity of Saint Bernard the skilled diplomacy of Anacletus failed, who praised devout Catholicism and attempted with all attainable means to secure himself the support of the King of France. He pretended excessive piety and based his plans for reform on that he wished to give back to the Church the purity of its first period, which was always a very popular slogan, because it went back to praiseworthy and noble motives. He had for this reason also taken on the name of the first successor of St. Peter, i.e. of Pope Anacletus I. We are here thus dealing, from all appearances, with one of the first manifestations of that "apocalyptic beast" which outwardly looks like a lamb—i.e. like our Lord Jesus Christ—but nevertheless acts like a dragon. Not in vain was Anacletus held in that time by Saints, Bishops, Clergy and Laity to be the Anti-Christ or, in less crass cases, as forerunner of the Anti-Christ.

The conduct of Lothar, the German Emperor, was to be decisive in this struggle. He remarked quite correctly that this affair concerned the Church itself, and therefore a second Council was called in Wiirzburg. Here Saint Norbert intervened decisively so that the German Bishops granted Innocent their full support. The almost decisive battle was, however, to be fought at the Holy Council of Rheims, towards the end of the year 1131. This Synod signified a defeat for Pedro Pierleoni, for there the Bishops of England, Castile and Aragon recognised Innocent as the legal Pope and in this respect joined themselves to the French and German bishops, who had already previously recognised him. At this Synod Pierleoni was excommunicated in addition.

Concerning this we must recognise that the religious Orders also played a decisive role in this struggle. They then recognised the danger which Jewry represented for the Church, and held Anacletus for the greatest evil which had so far threatened Christianity. Passionately and dynamically, they directed the activity of the monasteries at saving Holy Church from this deadly threat.

Unfortunately at the present day, when Holy Church is threatened to such a high degree by Communism and by the Jewish Fifth Column in the clergy, no sign is present for the enormous strength of the religious Orders. These could perhaps save the situation, if they equipped themselves for the struggle. They spend the day with devout services, which are very praiseworthy, but which under the present circumstances prevent them from dedicating themselves to the main task of saving the Church. In our opinion the Orders, when they awake from their lethargy, must take note that today—exactly as in the time of Pierleoni—it is impossible to perform all devout services since these take up their whole time. It would be necessary to abandon a part of these for the moment, in order to have sufficient time for the struggle for the salvation of Christianity. As a result a decisive step would already be taken.

May God, our Lord, illumine the highest Fathers of the Orders and lead before their eyes the necessity of a supreme decisive resolution in this matter! The prayers and the activity of the rules of the Order are very important; however, it is even more important to preserve Holy Church from the Jewish-Communist danger, which threatens to destroy her.

Saint Bernard and a great number of monks had to leave their quiet monasteries and disregard the strict rules of their Order (naturally with corresponding permission), in order to go upon the street and save Christianity. And they had success! After the Council of Rheims Pierleoni could still only count on the support of Italy (for the greater part) and especially on that of his brother-in-law, the Duke Roger II or Sicily, who ruled practically the entire peninsula. The marriage of the converted Jewess Pierleoni, the sister of the anti-Pope, nevertheless possessed a value in itself. This marriage, concluded for strategic reasons, now revealed itself as useful.

However, in order to finally conquer the Jew on the throne of St. Peter's a military invasion, a kind of crusade, was necessary. Saint Bernard and Saint Norbert persuaded Lothar, the Emperor of Germany, to undertake this. Accompanied by a modest-sized army, the Emperor met together with Innocent in North Italy and advanced unhindered as far as Rome, for many Roman noblemen betrayed Anacletus at the last minute. Lothar brought Innocent to the Throne in the Lateran, while Pierleoni fled to Sant'Angelo and had St. Peter under control. Therefore the Emperor was crowned in the Lateran by Innocent. But since Roger of Sicily then advanced at the head of a powerful army, Lothar had to order a retreat. For this reason the Pope could also not stay in Rome and had to flee. The Jewish anti-Pope was again master of the situation there. Innocent had withdrawn to Pisa and in this city summoned a great Council, in which Bishops of the whole of Christianity and a great number of abbots participated, who played an important role in this struggle. Among them was found St. Bernard, who, as always, conducted the struggle.

A year later Lothar advanced again to Italy, in order to set the legal Pope in Rome and to drive out the Jewish usurper. The conduct of the German Emperor is really worthy of note, for at those moments, critical for the Church, he left to one side his personal interests and the resentments of the Empire on account of the hard investiture dispute, and placed himself fully and completely for the salvation of Christianity.

If only there existed in the present world crisis some men, who imitated this noble conduct, placing behind them personal interests and national requirements and forgot often unfounded spite, in favour of the uniting of all peoples in the common struggle for liberation against Jewish Imperialism and its Freemasonic and Communist dictatorships!

With justice wrote Innocent II to Emperor Lothar during the terrible struggle: "The Church has chosen you—thanks to Divine intercession—as lawgiver like a second Justinian and has chosen you to combat the heretical infamy of the Jews like a second Constantine."

In this campaign Lothar was in fact successful in defeating Roger and caused him to retreat to Sicily, but he could not take Rome, where to the disgrace of all Christianity the Jewish anti-Pope remained in office. When Lothar left Italy with his armies, Roger of Sicily won it back almost completely, and Pierleoni seemed again to gain dangerously in power. The concern of all Christianity increased more and more, for the power of the anti-Pope again became threatening. Arnulf, the bishop of Liseaux, Manfred, the Bishop of Mantua and other respected Prelates described the latter simply as a Jew. Archbishop Walter of Ravenna called Anacletus's schism "Heresy of Jewish faithlessness", and the rabbi Louis Israel Newman gives the assurance that the party of Innocent held Anacletus for the "Anti-Christ."

These opinions were communicated to Emperor Lothar by the Cardinals, who supported the legal Pope. Innocent made into a battle-cry the assertion that the theft of the throne by Anacletus was a "foolish Jewish falsehood." The Rabbi, eager for knowledge, whom we quote, closes his report about the struggle with the following commentary: "The 'Jewish Pope' held his position successfully up to his death on 25th January 1138." This Jewish leader, a very honourable historian, thus admits quite clearly and without reserve or fear that Pierleoni was a Jew and describes him expressly as "Jewish Pope" while he risks at the same time to call Innocent II an anti-Pope.

When the Jewish usurper in Rome was buried with all Papal honours, his Cardinals' collegium—whose members, so it is said, almost all secretly practised the Jewish religion—were concerned with appointing a new Pope or, better, anti-Pope. The choice fell upon Cardinal Gregor, who was named with the approval and support of Roger of Sicily. The new Pope took on the name Victor IV.

Saint Bernard had in the meantime through his restless sermons and through the pressure of the German armies for the legal Pope been able to conquer the chief bulwarks of Pierleonis, such as Milan and other Italian cities. Finally the eloquent St. Bernard was also successful in taking Rome itself. During the last days the Jewish anti-Pope had to once again take refuge in St. Peter's and had also occupied the powerful palace of Sant'Angelo. The party of Pierleoni, however, became smaller and smaller and gradually dissolved, so that for the new anti-Pope Victor IV the situation was practically untenable. Thanks to the eloquence of Saint Bernard, he surrendered.

In this episode we encounter anew the tactics which play the decisive role for Jewry in all its political struggles: a Jewish party, or one controlled by Jews, attempts, if it believes itself lost, to prevent that the imminent defeat becomes total destruction or catastrophe by surrendering at the right time to the enemy and begging him for mercy. Or it negotiates the permission to be able to retain the highest possible positions by its promising subjection and loyalty. If this Jewish power remains preserved from destruction, it often retains valuable posts in the new government of the victor. However, it does not give thanks for this, but in secret instigates conspiracies, in order to gain powers again, to extend them in time and at the given moment to carry out the treacherous stroke which destroys the blissfully trusting, great-hearted enemy who gave the ungrateful opponent, instead of destroying him when it lay in its power, the possibility of gathering new strength and recovering for a new blow. This has been repeated again and again in the history of the struggles between Christians and Jews for more than a thousand years and was one of the principal reasons for the re-enlivement of the Synagogue after its great defeats. Unfortunately, however, the time had come, when the roles were changed.

Giordano and the other brothers of Pedro Pierleoni pretended to repent and legged for forgiveness, abjured all heresy and reconciled themselves with the legal Pope. With their hypocrisy they touched the heart of Innocent II and Saint Bernard, who magnanimously pardoned them. Instead of casting them down, the Pope left to them their positions at the Papal court. Later he even honoured them through homage and offices in the intention of achieving a stable permanent uniting of the Church. He attempted to win over the Jews with extreme kindness, so that they would perhaps become ashamed through such great-heartedness, and finally honestly repent.

On the Church level Innocent proceeded more energetically. In 1139 he called a Ecumenical Council, the second of the Lateran, which rejected the teachings of Arnaldo de Brescia and Pedro Bruys and simultaneously declared the actions of Anacletus as illegal and deposed all priests, bishops and cardinals. To put it briefly, all clergy who had been appointed by Pierleoni were declared to have lost all their consecrations, above all particularly those who were regarded as schismatics. The Generality regarded those as schismatics who tolerated heretics and such of Jewish origin among themselves, in a word, all who in a concealed manner adhered to Judaism. Thus the Holy Father purged the clergy of secret Jews of the Fifth Column, purified the hierarchy and made with one blow all Jewish infiltration into the clergy impossible, which was naturally carried out under the protection of the "Jewish Pope"—as the renowned Rabbi Newman calls him.

The liberality of the Pope in the political domain towards the defeated Giordano Pierleoni and his brothers was to become fateful for the Holy See. It must be remarked that Saint Bernard had certainly influenced the Pope in this policy of forgiveness. The former believed, in his over-great kindness, that Holy Church could perhaps soften the hardened hearts of the Jews if it pursued a different policy. Saint Bernard admittedly combated the schisms and heresy of the Jews, but exercised extreme caution and did not wish that they should be persecuted or any harm done to them. Put in another way, he wished to tame wolves with kindness.

As always the Jews abused the kindness of Saint Bernard and proved irrefutably that it is impossible to make wolves into obedient lambs. The occurrences of the past century have proved this and forced the Holy Church to proceed energetically and often mercilessly in her struggle against the Jews. The bonfires of the Inquisition were largely the consequence of the liberal policy of forgiveness. The tolerance and kindness preached by St. Bernard had failed lamentably.