NGO and POPE PAUL6th UN as LAST HOPE of MANKIND( LONG but worth it)

by orangefatcat 4 Replies latest jw friends

  • orangefatcat

    I find myself doing research and came across this today. I know it is long but with the UN NGO and Popes statement that the UN was the last hope of mankind, I feel compelled to print this off.

    The United Nations Meditation Room and Popes
    (anti-Popes?) Paul VI and John Paul II at the UN

    And finally, we come to the photos of the UN General Assembly Hall and the UN meditation room. On the left immediately below is the UN Meditation Room. Notice the similarity of the "barren" look and "sterile" feel between the UN Meditation Room, the masonic temples, the Anglican Churches and the Vatican II New "Catholic" Churches. According to the official United Nations website, the meditation room was "created by former Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld as 'a place where the doors may be open to the infinite lands of thought and prayer.'" One source has described it this as follows: "This room contains numerous freemasonic symbols and has an altar to the 'faceless god.'" (Revs. Francisco and Dominic Radecki, CMRI, What Has Happened to the Catholic Church?) Although in theory people of all faiths are welcome to us it, the stark, abstract chamber is tailor-made for occult/New Age groups, two of which enjoy the status of UN non-governmental organizations (NGOs): the Aquarian Age Community and the Lucis Trust (originally Lucifer Trust). These organizations hold their meetings in UN conference rooms and provide assistance, advice, and counseling to the U.N. officials and staff. The UN has also affiliated with other occultist-friendly activities and conducted its own, such as the Planetary Initiative, for which it named as director David Spangler, guru at Scotland's neo-pagan Findhorn Community. Spanger has been described by religious researcher J. Gordon Melton as the "primary architect/theoretician" of the New Age Movement and is particularly infamous for his contention that "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." And then there is the Earth Charter , which seeks to being about a new "global spirituality." (Among the Charter's supporters are the unrepentant Communist Mikhail Gorbachev and "liberation theology" propagandist Leonardo Boff.)

    On the right is a picture from October 4, 1965, of Paul VI sitting beneath three UN officials just before he spoke at the UN assembly. (Later that day he would go to Yankee Stadium for an outdoor Mass before 80,000 people.) In that address he called the UN "the last, best hope of mankind," and, according to Catholic author Piers Compton, "propagated the social gospel so dear to the heart of revolutionaries, without a single reference to the religious doctrines that they [the revolutionaries] found so pernicious." (The Broken Cross) Paul VI also wore the breastplate of the Jewish High Priest Caiphas while visiting the UN. (Caiphas was the High Priest who condemned Christ to death 2000 years ago in the secret, illegal middle-of-the-night trial which took place right after Judas betrayed Christ with a kiss in the Garden of Gethesemane, and right before Caiphas ordered that Christ be taken to Pontius Pilate.) Once the photos of Paul VI wearing the breastplate of Caiphas circulated, Abbe de Nantes of France challenged Paul him about this, and the breastplate was never seen in public again. The late traditional Mexican priest, Fr. Joaquin Saenz y Arriaga, wrote that

    Paul VI knows very well what this "Breastplate of Judgement,' the Ephod signifies; he knows its origins in the ritualistic dress of the Ancient Covenant [that is, the old testament]; he is not ignorant of the fact that Masons today use it as a distinctive mark of their high priest.

    The late writer William Strojie wondered whether Paul VI wore the breast plate of Caiphas because, just as Caiphas was condemning Christ to death and handing Him over to the worldly powers (Pontius Pilate, the Roman authority), Paul VI was attempting to condemn the Church (the Mystical Body of Christ) to death, and handing it over to the worldly powers (the United Nations). Concurrent with this was his greatly trumpeted handing over of the Papal tiara "for the poor" (November 14, 1964); likewise, he gave his pectoral cross and fisherman's ring to UN Secretary General U Thant, who, in turn, sold them to a Jewish businessman in the Midwest. (Rama Coomaraswamy, The Destruction of Christian Tradition. Compton notes that the the pair purchased for $64,000 and some of the gems from them were later seen adorning a Hollywood actress. )

    Significantly, after his speech and before heading to Yankee Stadium, Paul VI went to the meditation room, but just what he did in there is disputed. Most commentators writing about this interlude report that he prayed (which is creepy enough in itself), but others maintain that something far darker occurred. Compton, who believes that Paul VI was a conscious enemy of the Catholic Church, was at that time happy with the success the conspiracy had had at the soon-to-be closing Vatican II ?the goal of subverting the Church was well in hand . The UN address can be see as Paul VI's veiled communication to his brother conspirators around the world that it was time to rejoice. With this in mind, Compton writes: "It now remained to round off a truly historic visit with an initiatory rite that would put the seal on this newly admitted realization." According to Compton, the purpose of the occult ritual that took place in the meditation room:

    represented the early stage of a scheme, the fulfillment of which would be...the erection of the Temple of Understanding, on fifty acres of the Potomac in Washington, D.C....The underlying purpose of the Temple was plainly revealed by its...All-Seeing Eye...that represented six world faiths -- Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Confucianism, and Christianity...

    The Temple of Understanding calls itself a "spiritual United Nations," and is another group that has NGO status at the UN. It was conceived in 1960, and besides Paul VI, other founders and supporters have included John XXIII (photo, below left), Mother Teresa, U Thant, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlat Nehru, Trappist monk Thomas Merton, the Dali Lama, former-First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, Planned Parenthood's Margaret Sanger, socialist Norman Thomas, séance-obsessed Episcopal Bishop James Pike, and billionaire John D. Rockefeller, who largely bankrolled the seed money for the organization. Just as the United Nations constitutes the precursor of a one world government, so. too, the syncretistic Temple of Understanding can be seen as the basis for a one world religion.

    The photo below shows John Paul II addressing the UN General Assembly in 1995. He, too, is an ardent supporter of the United Nations, despite its abysmal record of propping up tyrannies (while allegedly championing freedom), trampling upon human rights (while claiming to uphold them), stirring up conflicts (while sending in its "peacekeepers") and the largest and being the world's most visible promoter of the New World Order. Former UN Under Secretary General Robert Muller, a member of the Novus Ordo church who promotes the late Jesuit Teilhard de Chardin's condemned evolutionary theology, is a favorite of John Paul II. Muller, who has been called the UN's "prophet of hope" wrote the "Framework for Planetary and Cosmic Consciousness" and is belongs to ex-Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev's Gorbachev Foundation. He blasphemously has referred to the United Nations as "the body of Christ." As a token of his esteem, John Paul II gave Muller a pectoral cross.

    In fact, in the early 1990s he stated: "By the end of this decade we will live under the first one world government that has ever existed in the society of nations ? a government with absolute authority to decide the basic issues of human survival. One world government is inevitable." (Cited, Malachi Martin, The Keys of This Blood, emphasis added. Although John Paul II supposedly believes in free will, this quote is deterministic in tone, sounding eerily like the Communist Manifesto, where Marx and Engels ?who, by virtue of their materialism, were strict determinists?declared that the eventual communism conquest of the world is inevitable.)

    Such a statement is consistent with other statements coming out of Rome since Vatican II. John XIII's Pacem in Terris (1963), the call was made "Men's common interests make it imperative that at long last a world-wide community of nations be established." Two years later, Paul VI, during his United Nations speech, would echo this, saying that the UN "is the obligatory path for modern civilization and world peace."

    And the Iraqi War has given John Paul II's Vatican an occasion to once again promote the concept of world government:

    Archbishop Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, said: "The crisis situation of the U.N., caused by the war in Iraq, does not contradict but reinforces the appeal in 'Pacem in Terris' for a world political authority." (U.N.'s role needed now more than ever, says Archbishop Martino," Zenit, 4/11/03)

    He went on to say that the UN should be a "subsidiary world authority" to guarantee "a manner of world government that favors peace" and that "it is time to undertake a constitutional engineering of humanity so that the United Nations can carry out its irreplaceable role."

    While world government is a concept embraced by John Paul II and the two Vatican II predecessors whose names he took, this no more resembles the traditional thinking of Popes concerning international relations than does the United Nations' meditation room resemble the interior of a Catholic Church. The notion of a singular global rule was addressed in 1920, by the reigning pontiff, Pope Benedict XV, (photo, right) who declared:

    The coming of a world state is longed for, and confidently expected, by all the worst and most distorted elements. This state, based on the principles of absolute equality of men and a community of possessions, would banish all national loyalties. In it no acknowledgement would be made of the authority of a father over his children, or of God over human society. If these ideas are put into practice, there will inevitably follow a reign of unheard-of terror.

    Respectfully your friend Orangefatcat.

  • Carmel

    No disrespect intended, but where did you dig up this righwinged neojw pap?


  • orangefatcat

    I was doing a research on Google when I came across this subject, I thought it was interesting sorry if it didn't appeal to you


  • Amazing1914


    Very interesting quotes. The UN is controversial, and will continue to be. To date it has been ineffective at much of its mission. On smaller fronts, it has done some good. But right now the "oil-for-food" scandal is dominating the attention on the UN. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.


    No disrespect intended, but where did you dig up this righwinged neojw pap?

    While some of the quotes can easily appear in so-called "right-winged" publications, the existence and mission of the UN is debated on both sides. Some so-called "left-winged" nuts do want a one-world government. Both sides fear each other, and both will likely be proved in error. My guess is that the UN will continue to be a weak and ineffective organization.

    Personally, I do not care for the UN because I believe that it is dangerous for humans to centralize and concentrate power in one body. Rather, I like the current system where there is local national authority, and the UN is little more than a forum for debate and some international agreements. The problem is that there are forces in the UN that are seeking to make it more powerful, have more authority, and use it as a force against capitalism. That thought is very unsettling for me and many others.

    Jim W.

  • Bas

    well, I think this piece is pretty black/white in it's reasoning and an attempt to damage the UN. I'm a determinist myself but I don't believe in a worldgovernment or the need for that and neither I believe in Communism. I deterministicly believe that the world will become a more harmonious, balanced place but it might take a very long time. It shouldn't be imposed by the UN and it doesn't do that nor does it aspire to do that. If anyone is trying to impose it's will on the world it's America I believe.


Share this