10 FACTS You Must Know About The Jesuits

reply to post by adjensen


Catholic hatred is rampant. I guess I better get used to it, its going to get much worse. Haven't got it in the face from any 7th Day Adventist yet, guess they are too busy with the Jesuits. Thanks for sharing that. I will pray for them.

I went to Catholic grade school, high school and one of the universities I attended was started by the Jesuits. In all that religious education I never, ever heard one negative thing said about Protestants not in school or in Church. My Catholic friends never bashed Protestants, nor has any other Catholic I have ever met in my 59 years of living. I say this without hesitation.

My ex-husband's uncle was a Jesuit missionary in India. He laid down his life for the people and lived in imitation of Christ.

Malachi Martin, the exorcist who did some great interviews with Art Bell was a Jesuit and wrote some great novels about the Church.

I have read some great books that helped me understand unconditional love and helped me to clarify my values that were written by a Jesuit. This was not part of my classroom education.

Judge a tree by the fruit it bears.

Didn't Jesus say something to the effect: "If the world hates you, know that they hated me first."?

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


Yeah, they're out there. T&C prevents me from naming names, but you'll run across them. Like cockroaches, the light of the truth usually sends the scurrying, but they're annoying none the less.

I am not a cradle Catholic, I converted out of the Methodist Church in 2012.

I don't know what the deal with Malachi Martin is, but he is often pointed to as evidence of satanism in the Vatican, and he wrote at least one book of fiction that misrepresented some things as being fact.

reply to post by adjensen


Welcome to the faith. Converts are some of the strongest, most passionate believers I know. Two of my best friends where Lutherans and they have beautiful faith.

I am a prodigal daughter who left the Church while going through a Legal Separation. I came back after the divorce four years later. Having your son tell you that he is praying that you come back to church is a powerful motivator.

I cannot say anything about Martin's books. I took them as fiction, but they did indicate that "the smoke of Satan had entered the Church" he knew the Pope that said this (Paul V I - I believe) and claims he read the 3rd secret of Fatima. His C2C interviews with Art Bell are or were available on youtube (grab some popcorn). How such a gentle soul could face years of fighting the devil baffles me.

I'll shut up. Converts seem to know more about Catholicism than Catholics. Your knowledge exceeds mine by a long shot.

sad_eyed_lady

Truth is my motive and a desire to see ATS to be a place where ignorance is denied. Claims made against the Jesuits have been discussed so often on ATS (search Jesuits if you doubt it). I am tired of hatred being spread on ATS based on lies.

It is a strange relationship with the truth indeed, once the Jesuits enter the picture, as their very name is synonymous with lies and deception.

www.oxforddictionaries.com...

Jesuitical
adjective
of or concerning the Jesuits.
dissembling or equivocating, in the manner associated with Jesuits.

If one is in harmony with the principle "the end justifies the means," then one will find harmony with the spirit of the Jesuit moral code. If not, then not so much.

"The end justifies the means." This maxim is generally attributed to the Jesuits, and while it might not be found in just that many words in their authorized books, yet the identical sentiment is found over and over again in their Latin works.

Dr. Otto Henne an Rhyn quotes many such sentiments from authorized Jesuit sources. We quote from him the following: "Herman Busembaum, in his 'Medulla Theologiae Moralis' (first published at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1650) gives this as a theorem (p. 320). Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita (when the end is lawful, the means also are lawful); and p. 504:Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media (for whom the end is lawful, the means are lawful also).

The Jesuit Paul Layman, in his 'Theologia Moralis,' lib. III., p. 20 (Munich, 1625), quoting Sanchez, states the proposition in these words. Cui concessus est finis, concessa etiam sunt media ad finem ordinata (to whom the end is permitted, to him also are permitted the means ordered to the end).

Louis Wagemann, Jesuit professor of moral theology, in his 'Synopsis Theologiae Moralis' (Innsbruck and Augsburg, 1762) has. Finis determinat moralitatem actus (the end decides the morality of the act)."–"The Jesuits," pp. 47, 48. New York:1895.

www.sundaylaw.net...://www.sundaylaw.net/books/other/edwardson/facts/fof27.htm

When you get to this post maybe you will understand the effort it takes for one person to factually research and debunk the claims made: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Truth to tell, I didn't see a whole lot of debunking in those two posts, let alone the author's claim to have "destroyed" the op. Lots of snark and deflection, yes, but not a lot in the way of actual debunking.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe

www.sundaylaw.net…

lol, thank you for providing evidence of crackpot Seventh Day Adventist obsession with the Jesuits.

adjensen

For whatever reason, most of the Jesuit-specific disinfo can be traced back to fringe Seventh Day Adventists. I don't know what the connection is, but those are the guys who really get their panties in a bunch over the Jesuits. General hatred of Catholics and the Roman church is a lot more diversified, extending to many Protestant faiths, as well as non-Christians.

It is wrong to conflate the Jesuits with Catholics in general. The Jesuits are their own special case and the disdain they have earned throughout history is anything but disinfo or limited to the SDA, as seen from the following quotes.

My history of the Jesuits is not eloquently written, but it is supported by unquestionable authorities, [and] is very particular and very horrible. . . . If ever there was a body of men who merited eternal damnation on earth and in hell, it is this Society of [Ignatius de] Loyola.
John Adams (2nd President of the United States)

It is my opinion that if the liberties of this country – the United States of America – are destroyed, it will be by the subtlety of the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests, for they are the most crafty, dangerous enemies to civil and religious liberty. They have instigated MOST of the wars of Europe.
Marquis de LaFayette (General in George Washington’s army.)

The war [i.e., the American Civil War of 1861-1865] would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits.
Abraham Lincoln

The Jesuits are a MILITARY organization, not a religious order. Their chief is a general of an army, not the mere father abbot of a monastery. And the aim of this organization is power – power in its most despotic exercise – absolute power, universal power, power to control the world by the volition of a single man [i.e., the Black Pope, the Superior General of the Jesuits]. Jesuitism is the most absolute of despotisms [sic] – and at the same time the greatest and most enormous of abuses…
Napoleon Bonaparte

The Jesuits…are simply the Romish army for the earthly sovereignty of the world in the future, with the Pontiff of Rome for emperor…that’s their ideal. …It is simple lust of power, of filthy earthly gain, of domination – something like a universal serfdom with them [i.e., the Jesuits] as masters – that’s all they stand for. They don’t even believe in God perhaps.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky

The presence of the Jesuits in any country, Romanist [i.e., Catholic] or Protestant, is likely to breed social disturbance.
Lord Palmerston (British Prime Minister)

Between 1555 and 1931 the Society of Jesus [the Jesuits] was expelled from at least 83 countries, city states and cities, for engaging in political intrigue and subversion plots against the welfare of the State
J.E.C. Shepherd (Canadian historian)

reply to post by adjensen


You are quite welcome. I don't know anything about SDA, but I'm not sure how dismissing the source negates the text sourced by those you scorn, but if it brings you comfort, well, go with what works for you.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe


Go ahead and show the link you found these at please.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe


Like I said, there is some weird connection between the Seventh Day Adventists and the Jesuits (as opposed to the Roman Catholic church in general.) I have no idea what it is, but it's pretty consistent, as you showed.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe

Dear BlueMoonJoe,

I'm just settling down to my computer after a day in a convention / meeting and I'm a little bit tired. It's being held just a suburb or two north of our largest city, a change for a guy in a town of less than 25,000.

Let me tell you, without any flowery language, or cute tricks, what I was trying to do with my posts.

I started reading the OP and noticed what appeared to be factual errors in the first two or three points. This surprised me, after all, these were supposed to be researched and proven "facts." I looked at the points a little more closely and spotted more factual errors. Switching over to Wiki and other sources, I found that just about all of the statements had factual errors in them.

If someone is going to claim they have facts which have been researched and there are errors everywhere (and those errors are pointed out and documented), I'd say, yes, the OP was destroyed.

But, I make mistakes. There are things I need to learn, so show me which of my statements are false and show me why, with evidence.

I try not to deflect or anything else like that. I want to know what's true, and currently the position I've shown is more accurate than anything posted by the OP. So, teach me. Show me specifically where I went wrong. Otherwise I'l have to believe that still nobody is prepared to defend the OP.

With respect,
Charles1952

charles1952
I knew we'd get to the Nazi's sometime. But I was expecting something more hateful.

I know you don't want to hear it, but so what? An organizational structure is something devised to keep people organized and directed to a goal. It says nothing whatever about what the goal is.

Right you are, it says nothing about what the goal is. So what is the goal and why would Hitler specifically model the SS after the Jesuits of all groups? Was it their "hippy rebel" streak he found so attractive? I could be wrong, but I'm guessing not.

But perhaps this oft quoted bit by Walter Shellenberg, Chief of the Nazi Sicherheitdienst (SD) hits the mark squarely:

"The SS had been organized by Himmler according to the principles of the Jesuit Order. The rules of service and spiritual exercises prescribed by Ignatius de Loyola constituted a model which Himmler strove carefully to copy. Absolute obedience was the supreme rule; every order had to be executed without comment."

reply to post by adjensen


Regardless of what that connection may be, your seeming intent was to dismiss the text being sourced by that SDA site as being somehow negated because you judged those citing it to be crackpots. That is a smear tactic. If that is what you are seeking to do, fine. If not, less than fine.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe


I denote them to be crackpots, because they don't have any valid evidence for their position, they just seem to be universally against the Jesuits.

If you have valid arguments for that position, you are welcome to present them. I am not a Jesuit, so I have no horse in the race.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe

Dear BlueMoonJoe,

I'm certainly willing to discuss thing with you, but we have to be honest with each other. You imply, in a rather sneaky way, you must admit, that the SS and Hitler admired something about the Jesuit goals, beliefs, and attitudes.

You don't quite make clear what those goals, beliefs and attitudes were, you just make a vague connection between Jesuit and Nazi, and hope people will be horrified. I know you saw my reply to the OP, you quoted part of it. I can't believe that you didn't see the rest, you just chose not to include it. Here it is for those keeping score at home.

I know you don't want to hear it, but so what? An organizational structure is something devised to keep people organized and directed to a goal. It says nothing whatever about what the goal is. I bet you didn't know that both the Jesuits and the Nazis used hammers to drive nails. What more proof is needed? But if someone is trying to sneakily and dishonestly associate the Jesuits with the Nazis in their goals:

The Nazi regime considered the Jesuits one of their most dangerous enemies. According to John Pollard, the Jesuit's "ethos represented the most intransigent opposition to the philosophy of Nazism." A Jesuit college in the city of Innsbruck served as a center for anti-Nazi resistance and was closed down by the Nazis in 1938. Jesuits were a target for Gestapo prosecution and many Jesuit priests were deported to concentration camps. (Emphasis added)

As far as I can see, you just repeated the OP's charge, making it slightly more lurid.

Honestly, truly, and sincerely, I want to know truth. We have to search for it honestly and openly. If you're willing to, I'm glad to have you along. If not, enjoy your trip, but we're on different paths.

With respect,
Charles1952

charles1952
reply to post by BlueMoonJoe

 

I started reading the OP and noticed what appeared to be factual errors in the first two or three points. This surprised me, after all, these were supposed to be researched and proven "facts." I looked at the points a little more closely and spotted more factual errors. Switching over to Wiki and other sources, I found that just about all of the statements had factual errors in them.

I haven't been able to go through all of your posts closely, but from the bit I have touched on, yours are not without their own errors. But before you even touched upon anything in the way of specifics, you set out to smear the op with lizard leavings and whatever else you were throwing at it. That in itself was as case of "the lady doth protest too much" and is what caught my attention. Barring that, I'd have probably not have replied at all.

As you went on, it seemed to be more dismissing and deflecting than debunking. The latter has its value and I am all for it. But the smearing and broad statements that everything there was a lie speaks of an agenda beyond simply dealing with the truth.

If someone is going to claim they have facts which have been researched and there are errors everywhere (and those errors are pointed out and documented), I'd say, yes, the OP was destroyed.

As I have read through this thread, those who are taking umbrage at the charges being leveled at the Jesuits all have one thing in common: ad hominem and stir. It is a classic go to move by those on the weak side of any argument. When you can't answer the charge, charge the source and dismiss it out of hand.

The op is hardly a perfect site, but at a glance it is far better sourced than any of the wiki level strikes against it. To dismiss it out of hand is to dismiss without investigation the data from other sources that it has gathered.

Regardless of whatever errors or overstatements it makes, it is pulling from a deep well of historical evidence against the Jesuits that cannot be dismissed because of the faults of the person collecting those sources. Even if you were to debunk all of the op's own statements, and you in no way have done so, you still haven't dismissed the sources he has drawn upon, nor have you made a good case for your own overstatements and errors.

But, I make mistakes. There are things I need to learn, so show me which of my statements are false and show me why, with evidence.

You jumped on the "abolished" usage as if you had debunked the full claim, yet you were shown to be wrong by the bull itself. Glass houses and all that. The nazi bit was classic deflection, especially the bit about the hammers and nails. But the goals part is important, as is the complete obedience aspect.

I try not to deflect or anything else like that. I want to know what's true, and currently the position I've shown is more accurate than anything posted by the OP. So, teach me. Show me specifically where I went wrong. Otherwise I'l have to believe that still nobody is prepared to defend the OP.

We shall see as we go. Have a good evening.

reply to post by adjensen


This has nothing to do with SDA per se, so let us leave them behind. Look at the actual text in the post I put up regarding the ends justify the means and tell why you do not think it valid evidence.

reply to post by BlueMoonJoe

Dear BlueMoonJoe,

You have spent a lot of time responding to me. Perhaps we can make this more productive. Instead of saying "I'm obviously right, and besides, showing that the sources quotes have factual errors doesn't destroy the source," we haven't accomplished much yet.

This is my suggestion. If I have said that a statement of the OP's was a factual error, and you believe it is not, give me some evidence that the OP is correct.

If I have said something that you think is wrong, point it out specifically and show me your evidence.

Arguing about whether the Jesuits were "suppressed" or "abolished" seems to be missing the point and focusing on minutiae, but if you need to continue on that I suppose I'll have to.

How about tackling the statement that all of the Pope's confessors have to be Jesuits, and only a Jesuit can absolve him of his sins? What do you have to say about the Jesuits killing Tsar Alexander I when historinas say it was an illness? How about proving John Wilkes Booth's connection to the Jesuits?

Please, deal with facts, not vague allegations of "deflecting."

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


The Abraham Lincoln story has some legs.

It is all based upon his relationship with a priest named Charles Chiniquy.

Here is a link.

I am not saying that the Jesuits killed Lincoln, but much more is there than what we learn in history books.
It's worth investigating prior to showing contempt.

Well, since I am so ignorant about SDA I thought I would try to find a source of information about them. It does provide an inside view from a former member who converted to Catholicism.

My Journey From Seventh-Day Adventism to the Catholic Church

I enjoyed the read. Just putting it out their for anyone who is trying to understand the 7th Day Adventitst. Who according to this ex-member do have major issues with Catholicism.

After reading this I will not put any stock in SDA links.

Please don't tell me Jesuits are not Catholics. This insults my intelligence. Why would they set up Catholic Universities if they were not Catholics?

I do believe there is a conspiracy here and it evolves around why the Jesuits are being attacked as bringing on the Anti-Christ. I suspect that those who are involved in the NWO are more than happy to behead the Catholic Church their biggest adversary.

Perhaps going to the horses mouth and reading what the Catholic Church says about them is the best way to really understand the Jesuits which are most definitely Christ centered. They are called the Society of Jesus for a reason.

The Society of Jesus

reply to post by kyviecaldges


WHO WAS CHARLES CHINIQUY? Facts Versus Falsehood

Chiniquy's writings are still widely distributed and promoted, in books and on webpages. The goal of this website is to provide factual information concerning Charles Chiniquy and his allegations against the Catholic Church.