Talk:Jesuit conspiracy theories

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Catholicism (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Catholicism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Rename to Vatican Conspiracy theory[edit]

It would be far more appropriate to widen the topic to include all of the military orders of the Vatican.Amish0927, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The Vatican doesn't have military orders other than the swiss guard, so that would be difficult. It would really be better if this article were deleted and the contents included in, perhaps, a general List of conspiracy theories article. The article has been sitting around without proper sources for over 2 years now. It recently gained one source, but it is not reliable and so technically cannot be used. This article is really in the poorest condition it could be and merging it with another article would just be a lot easier.Farsight001 (talk) 17:05, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
You do show your lack of knowledge in this area. Or is it a willing biased blind spot? The Vatican has numerous military Orders (knights) besides the Jesuits (Regimini militantis ecclesiae or "To the Government of the Church Militant"). There are the Knights of Malta, the Order of Christ, the over 1.8 million strong Knights of Columbus, and the Pope has recently absolved the Templars.
There are numerous sources and authors on the topic that I'm aware of. The Tupper Saussy quote you keep removing is just a short exerpt from his book Rulers of Evil that has a Jesuit on the front cover, because the book is about the Jesuits! I could pull a direct quote out of the book to tie the other quote with the Jesuits, or just list the book with no quote. Jesuits were involved with the founding of Washington, D.C., as the book very well documents. It's why Georgetown U is in Washington DC and why Washington City was placed in Maryland the Catholic colony at that time.
It would be alright if the page was merged with NWO cospiracy theory, because the Jesuit conspiracy theory makes the case that the NWO and the Vatican's Roman Empire are one and the same, which involves the huge Freemason organization founded by the Vatican's Knights Templar after they were suppressed, and that the "Jewish conspiracy" or "Judeo-Masonic" claims are Protocol propaganda.Amish22:50, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
No, I am not showing lack of knowledge here. Those orders are not militaries. I think you don't understand what a military is, nor what the Church means by "militant" because it has nothing to do with armies or forces or fighting. I myself qualify as a church militant, but am in no order or organization and am not even so much as registered with my parish. And you know who else is a "church militant"? YOU ARE! Because "Church militant" simply refers to all Christians (no, not just Catholics) who have yet to die. The Church often uses archaic definitions for terms like this. The "Vatican Secret Archives" are no secret in exactly the same way.
The Jesuits are a religious order. The Knights of Columbus is a fraternal charity organization. Unless you count the swiss guard, the Church has not had any sort of army for centuries. The Knights of Malta, despite it's formal name, is also not a military. It provides medical and other humanitarian aid to those who need it. In addition, it is not under Church control. The Military Order of Christ is also not under church control and has not been any sort of military for centuries. You think I have a lack of knowledge? You very obviously did nothing more than read the names of these organizations and jump to conclusions. That kind of research would have gotten me a failing grade way back in Kindergarten, let alone the real world.
The quote I keep removing is being removed because it makes no mention of the Jesuits, or of a conspiracy theory. And since this article is titled "Jesuit conspiracy theories" it is, by definition, and as I have already explained, irrelevant here. Not only is it just hanging there without any real paragraph flow, disrupting to already poor form of the article, but it has no valid reason for being in the article in the first place. Perhaps the book is about the jesuits, but it is a book by a no-name, non-RS. Even if it was by an RS, it would still not qualify for inclusion because it has nothing to do with conspiracy theories pertaining to the Jesuits. I really doesn't even matter if the guy is the world's foremost expert on Jesuits. If the quote is not about conspiracies, it has no reason to be in the article. Period. End of story. So cut the crap and quit sticking it back in.
And again, since Tupper Saussy is not an RS, nothing he says about the Jesuits creating washington D.C., or really, anything else he says, can be used - not just in this article, but in mostly any article. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the guy was a schizophrenic mess who had absolutely no idea what he was talking about? I never could understand why you anti-Catholics go around looking for and using completely obscure no-names with no formal relevant education when you could even more easily snag a source from an actual qualified expert in the field and read that instead. Do you really never wonder why every formally educated relevant expert on the planet disagrees with the word of just a handful, or often even just one individual with no education whatsoever on the subject? Do you really think that the thousands of experts who went through decades of school each are all wrong, while one person working with no expertise and far FAR less access to good resources is right? That's truly ridiculous.
As for merging the page with another - it would have to be merged with a more general page such as list of conspiracy theories. Since none of the conspiracies currently on the article page have anything to do with the new world order, we can't really merge it with the article you suggest. Merging would involve moving over all of the conspiracy theories mentioned on this page to the other article. Even if some of the conspiracies on this page did have something to do with the NWO, we can already see that others do not. Adding them to that article would be adding information completely irrelevant to the article's subject - which is specifically conspiracy theories pertaining only to the NWO.
BTW, you do know that joining the Freemasons incurs an immediate and automatic excommunication for Catholics, right?Farsight001 (talk) 11:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Say What?[edit]

"Jesuitism is the practice the Jesuits employ for their Counter-Reformation.[1]" GeneCallahan (talk) 15:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know either, but I was just going to nominate the whole article for deletion or merging with a general conspiracy theory article next time I don't feel particularly lazy. This article is just...blah. There's really no reason for it.Farsight001 (talk) 16:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Unbalanced[edit]

I feel as though this article is unbalanced in favor of the Anti-Catholics. I feel this due to the absence of refutations or criticisms of most of the claims made on this page (especially when the most basic research discredits them) and use of fraudulent and hugely biased sources to assert claims. I know this is common in conspiracy theories but most other conspiracy pages have a "criticisms" or "refutations" section of some kind. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.36.206.39 (talk) 02:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

With the inquisition and tyrannical rule of the papal states including the period of the 30 Years War, anti catholicism can be equated with being anti war, anti genocide, anti murder, anti corruption, pro constitution. Anti Catholicism in this regards has nothing to do with the Catholic faith (i.e. Mary, Eucharist, ect). If anything the article needs greater expansion on the conspiratorial workings of the Vatican's military Orders.
Some quotes to consider in connection to the founding and organizing of the Freemasons:

In 1139 Pope Innocent issued a bull placing the Templars under an exclusive vow of papal obedience - a measure by which Aimeric effectively put all Templar resources at the disposal of the papacy. As their list of properties lengthened with donations from Italy, Austria, Germany, Hungary and the Holy Land, the Templars built hundreds of stone castles. Convinced they were building a new world, the Templars called each other frère maçon (brother mason). Later this was anglicized into Freemason. Finally, on Friday, October 13, 1307, King Philip of France arrested all but thirteen of the Templars in France, tried them and, upon evidence of their practice of the cabalah, found them guilty of blasphemy and magic. At least fifty knights were burned at the stake. A subtle provision in the Vox clamantis transferred most of the Templar estates to the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, who took possesion after King Philip's death. In Germany and Austria, the Templars became "Rosicrucians" and "Teutonic Knights." The Teutonic Knights grew strong in Mainz, birthplace of Guetenberg's press. Six centuries later, as the "Teutonic Order," the Knights would provide the nucleus of Adolf Hitler's political support in Munich and Vienna. The Edinburgh lodge would become the headquarters of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, which Masonic historians call "American Freemasonry" because all but five of the signers of the Declaration of Independence are said to have practiced its craft. In Spain and Portugal the Templars became the "Illuminati", and the "Knights of Christ." It was under the red pattée cross of the Knights of Christ that Columbus had taken possession of what he called "las Indias" for King Ferdinand V of Spain, the Holy Roman Emperor. (Rulers of Evil, p.39-40, Tupper Saussy)

"It is curious to note too that most of the bodies which work these, such as the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, the Rite of Avignon, the Order of the Temple, Fessler's Rite, the "Grand Council of the Emperors of the East and West -- Sovereign Prince Masons," etc., etc., are nearly all the offspring of the sons of Ignatius Loyola. The Baron Hundt, Chevalier Ramsay, Tschoudy, Zinnendorf, and numerous others who founded the grades in these rites, worked under instructions from the General of the Jesuits. The nest where these high degrees were hatched, and no Masonic rite is free from their baalful influence more or less, was the Jesuit College of Clermont at Paris." (Isis Unveiled, H. P. Blavatsky, p.390)

The Roman Church's military Orders are important to understanding Fascism and Communism. Amish 21:37, 13, October 2010 (UTC0
Do you really think changing the way you sign stuff will fool anyone? As I already explained to you before, 1) the Catholic Church doesn't have any military orders currently, unless you include the swiss guard. 2) Tupper Saussy is not a WP:RS. Nor is H. P. Blavatsky. I also suggest you actually visit the Spanish inquisition and the 30 years war pages before you cite them, because they don't even remotely say what you wish they did. To be extremely blunt - your belief in this evil oppressive tyrannical murderous Catholic Church is historical hogwash. Do you have a suggestion for article improvement? If not, please don't bother posting anything. Talk pages are for article improvement ONLY, not for you to post ridiculous rants from people pontificating on a subject they have no education in.Farsight001 (talk) 22:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
P.S. I warned you that you'd get blocked if you continued posting as you did. Did you learn anything from it?Farsight001 (talk) 22:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Blatantly heavy bias in reporting of Titanic conspiracy[edit]

Research shows the crew of the Titanic leading up to, and the night of the sinking, observed that the Captain had been acting very strangely, including the ignoring of many telegrams and of running the ship too fast in poor weather at night. The article on this Wikipedia does not shed any light whatsoever on the positive facts on this event, but instead rules it out without facts from the outset. So while the conspiracy may not be probable, does not mean that certain evidence shows that it could have been possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.219.66 (talk) 22:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

What research are you speaking of? If you don't provide it, nothing can be done. As for it being possible - no one cares. It's possible that the Jesuits sank the ship, and it's possible the U.S. sank it, and it's possible aliens sank it. There's no use in saying what's possible.Farsight001 (talk) 08:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Far East[edit]

The history of the Jesuits in the Far East does not really fit in with the conspiracy theory "mindset" as shown here. The account of the "Chinese Rites" affair is extremely inaccurate, and fails to mention one genuinely interesting bit of Jesuit-bashing. The Chinese Rites affair was essentially a part of a long-running feud between the Jesuits and the Dominicans, which the Dominicans won by having the Jesuits ordered out of the Far East. An invaluable source for the real history of the Jesuits in the Far East is A Vision Betrayed: Jesuit Mission in Japan and China, 1549-1742 by Andrew Ross

Placing of the information in this article[edit]

I am inclined to agree with those who find this article unsatisfactory. It seems to me that a section on "Jesuit conspiracy theories" could most usefully be placed in an article on the Society of Jesus as a whole, with references to other conspiracy theories from there. You can't meaningfully separate the nature of the theories from the special "aura" that seems to hang around the Jesuits more than almost any other Catholic order, except the Templars and - perhaps - Opus Dei. This "aura" is a function of their historical place, starting with their special role in the Counter-Reformation.

As well as conspiracy theories, there's downright lunacy[edit]

I would add to the list of Jesuit "theories" the person who writes:

"By 1851, despite Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler no proof existed of the rotation of the earth.

The Jesuits were getting DESPERATE because without a rotating earth the theory of evolution falls flat on its face. "

http://www.reformation.org/stationary-earth.html

I confess that this is closer to paranoia than "theory", with its total detachment from historical actualities.

Jorvikian (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The Jesuits and Freemasonry[edit]

Numerous researchers of the history of Freemasonry claim the Freemasons were founded by the Knights Templar after their suppression.

* Saussy, F. Tupper, Rulers of Evil, pp.39-40, Harper Collins, 2001.
* Yahya, Harun, Those Who Plot Evil Actions: Templars and the Freemasons, Global Publishing, 2007.
* Lina, Juri, Architects of Deception: The Concealed History of Freemasonry, Referent Publishing, 2004.
* Sutton, William, The New Age Movement and The Illuminati-666, The Institute of Religious Knowledge, 2005.
* Veith, Walter, Total Onslaught DVD lectures, self produced video series, 2003.
* Ralph Epperson,(radio)
* Stan Monteith,(radio), Brotherhood of Darkness.
* William Schnoebelen,(video)
* Mark Dice,[1], The Illuminati: Fact and Fiction, 2009.
* Secret History of the Templar Freemasons (video)
* Helena Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, p.390, 1877

These authors and others too numerous to list report, as knights some Freemasons answer to the Jesuit General who, since fall of the Papal States, is said to rule an empire with political bodies in London, Washington, and includes the United Nations. The theory says Freemasons act as the non Catholic wing of the conspiracy while the Knights of Malta, Knights of Columbus, Opus Dei and numerous others are the Catholic wing, all directed by the Jesuit General.

The construction of Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland (1440–1490) by the Sinclair family was the resurfacing of the Knights Templar. Accordingly, the First Degree and Mark Masonry was introduced by William Sinclair, the alleged first Grand Master and founder of Freemasonry. (Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key, London, 1996.) Rosslyn Templars insist there are different lineages of Templars. (Official website[1], Opposing view[1]) In Portugal the Templars reformed as the Knights of Christ.

Saussy and others correctly note the Freemason degrees Knights Templar and the Knight Kadosh, derive from the ancient Knights Templar. The Freemason's youth organization DeMolay was named after the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, Jacques de Molay. Builders of Europe's gothic Castles and Cathedrals, the Templars often called each other frère maçon (brother mason).

Mackey's Freemason Encyclopedia reports in great detail the Jesuit's College in Paris sponsored a group to write the degrees that would become modern Freemasonry. (Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Masonic History Company, 1917, four entries: 1)CLERMONT, COLLEGE, 2)Jesuits, 3)PERFECTION, RITE, 4) SCOTTISH RITE).

These authors theorize some Freemasons as Templar Knights act as Jesuit temporal coadjutors for various political intrigue, and through a chain of command answer to the Jesuit General.

"See, my lord, from this room I govern not only Paris, but China, not only China but the whole world, without anyone knowing how tis managed." General of the Jesuits, speaking to the Duke of Brancus. (Steinmetz, Andrew, History of the Jesuits, Vol. 1, p. 107, Published: R. Bentley, 1848. Quoting Michelangelo Tamburini, 14th Jesuit Superior General, 1706-1730)

Other societies and knighthoods founded by the Jesuits and the Templars include Yale's Skull and Bones (Russell Trust), The Council on Foreign Relations, The Bilderberg Group, The Bohemian Grove, and soon after the Templars' suppression the Order of the Garter was created for the royals, to continue Templar rule in these countries under a new name. Amish 01:09, 14 Fedruary 2011 (UTC)

I already explained to you what is wrong with your edits. You have made no attempt to fix the issues, nor do you understand, despite the painstaking explanation, that much of this information doesn't belong here in the first place. If you're not going to fix the problems with your edits, nothing is going to change.Farsight001 (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
This is Jesuit conspiracy, it belongs. You are mistaken. The military knights is the real Jesuit conspiracy. The Jesuit General only directs the knights, seldom involved themselves (Jesuits). The Vatican created the knights and the knights answer to the Vatican at the feet of the JG, kissing the ring where they take orders. You however are looking for conspiracy theories to debunk instead of the real Jesuit conspiracy. That's your problem not mine. There are theories about exactly how it all works but some of it is not a theory. Knights were created by the Vatican and the Vatican can dissolve them. They answer to the JG who directs their actions. For instance, the KoM (hospitallers) founded and run the hospitals controlling healthcare, some believe worldwide. They also are found in political office. Many politicians and intel officers running agencies worldwide are KoM. They answer to the JG and that is no theory. Many have a problem with this as it violates the US Constitution on holding titles of nobility subserviant to foreign powers (art.I sec.9). The new info was the Mackey citation, and a couple of citations from the history of FM wikipedia secion relevant to this. If you want another conspiracy theory section look into the Jesuit's role in the assassination of President Lincoln.[1] Amish 03:27, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Again, I already explained it to you. You can't just say "it's a Jesuit conspiracy theory so it belongs" and go about ignoring everything I told you the last few months. Quit ignoring what I say and maybe it'll actually be easier for you. Contrary to what you obviously think, I'm actually here to help you, not hassle you. Go back and re-read what I've already explained. Gain understanding. Then discuss, then come to an agreement, and LASTLY, edit.Farsight001 (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The included Eric Phelps book Vatican Assassins is based on this very thing, papal knights directed by the JG, and includes FM. I believe Eric only concludes a Jesuit origins of FM leaving out the Templars. He then often makes reference to political figures in history belonging to the KoM being subservants of the JG. There are free copies of his book online. You should look through it and make yourself familiar with the material. I certainly do not ascribe to his theological view throughout the book. You should also discontinue reverting without cause or reason every single edit I make. The film The History of the Jesuits and other similar films and books are relevant to Jesuit conspiracy theory if only in external links. Amish 21:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
You're still not listening. You obviously haven't done what I suggested and gone back and re-read what I have said before. I am not reverting without cause. I am reverting because you refuse to read and understand policies, rules, and other things that structure and govern the way things work around here, and therefore, continuously add stuff to articles that don't belong. Again - I am trying to HELP. Stop refusing and resisting my help.Farsight001 (talk) 23:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Political assassinations[edit]

The Gunpowder Plot of 1605, was a failed assassination attempt against King James I of England by a group of provincial English Catholics. Details of the assassination attempt were allegedly known by the principal Jesuit of England, Father Henry Garnet.

The plan was to blow up the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament on 5 November 1605, as the prelude to a popular revolt in the Midlands during which James' nine-year-old daughter, Princess Elizabeth, was to be installed as the Catholic head of state.72.161.233.17 (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you want us to do with this info. If you want this in the article, I'm not sure it belongs. For one, while there may have been Jesuit knowledge of it and a Jesuit directly involved, one can no more use that to attribute blame to all Jesuits than they can attribute it to all men because men were involved. More importantly, IMO, the Gunpowder plot is pretty much irrefutable fact. It happened, and we know for sure that it happened. Hence, there's not much in the way of a conspiracy, so it's outside the scope of the article.Farsight001 (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
The plot was to install a Catholic on the throne for the Church (holy roman empire) to rule the country not an act of an individual.

I'm changing the name of this section to add more political assassination theories.

Eric Phelps, Bill Hughes, Charles Chiniquy, Samuel Morse and many writers have claimed the Jesuits were the organisers of the assassination of president Lincoln, since soon after the event. The plot is said to have been organised at the boarding house of Mary Surratt and involved her son John Surratt. Both later stood trial. Robert Redford recently directed a film about this conspiracy theory, The Conspirator.

Phelps and still other websites find evidence of the Jesuits directing the assassination of President John F Kennedy. This is said to be due to the Catholic Church's involvement in the Vietnam war and installing the Catholic dictator Diem who persecuted the Buddhists. President Kennedy wanted to bring the Buddhist persecutions to an end. After authorizing a coup against Diem JFK was assassinated within couple of weeks. To garner support from other agencies needed to pull off the assassination plot and coverup the Jesuit led CIA needed to create a crisis for a false motive; JFK was said to have caused a nuclear standoff between the US and Russia in the form of the Cuban missile crisis.

There should be an inclusion in the wikipedia about these outlandish claims.72.161.233.17 (talk) 06:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Well-founded allegations[edit]

That a number of Jesuits were seeking to politically undermine the government of England in the late 16th-century and early 17th-century, in line with officially-announced Catholic policies (Regnans In Excelsis, An Admonition to the nobility and people of England etc.) was factually true, and not any kind of far-out wacky "conspiracy theory". The Jesuits were probably not greatly involved in grand over-arching deep-laid long-range "conspiracies" as such, but in their early days their eagerness of some of them to very directly involve themselves in political matters as militant intellectual shock-troops of the Pope, and their reputation for their willingness to cut ethical corners in pursuit of goals considered good, gave rise to much criticism from many quarters, by no means always falling under "conspiracy theories"[sic]. AnonMoos (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Leone 1848[edit]

I've seen a claim repeated in a singe conspiracy article, that it re-posted on various websites and blogs. And repeats of this article are all I can find researching it. It say that a man named Leone who was a Jesuit published a book called "The Jesuit Conspiracy" in 1848 claiming to expose a Jesuit Conspiracy, and that this helped spark the 1448 revolutions. My attempts to verify this have been fruitless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.131.26.175 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2014 (UTC)