The gnosis of

THE word derives from the Greek “ gnosis ”, which means knowledge. At the beginning of Christianity, gnosis was a thorough knowledge of the mysteries of God. When people had been baptised and instructed in the mysteries, when they professed the Creed, they had a raging thirst for « the knowledge of the glory of God on the Face of Christ » (2 Co 4:6). St. Paul, however, had already warned his disciple against possible deviations: « O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid the pointless philosophical discussions and opposition of a so-called knowledge (allegedly gnosis). By professing it, some people have deviated from the faith. » (1 Tm 6:20)

John-Paul IIVery early on, in fact, certain minds let the decadent, pagan philosophy of their time contaminate their faith, in a sort of reciprocal contract: philosophy would become Christian provided that Christianity became philosophic. There often resulted an odious mixture that the Fathers of the Church severely fought and anathematised, principally St. Irenaeus in his Adversus Hæreses, the real title of which was « On the Detection and Overthrow of the So-Called Gnosis ».

Today when we speaks about “ gnosis ” and “ Gnostics ”, we are referring to people who, unfaithful to grace, no longer savour true mystical life. Since they find the Catholic Creed, liturgy and morality too petty, too boring, they dream of something more open, more intelligent, which better meets the needs of the modern world, its way of thinking, of speaking, of living and of getting one’s kicks, as they say today… It is generally characteristic of freethinkers with great intellectual capacity, coupled with immense pride, who invent a theory that changes life. It is a mixture that allows them to go beyond the old class, cultural and religious antagonisms by bringing out everything that is positive in each of them. They are soon followed by a whole host of good people who, duped by their fallacious reasoning, follow them on the wide and easy path leading to perdition. (...)


The expression is Bruno Chenu’s, the editor-in-chief of La Croix: « The Gospel of John Paul II is the Gospel of man. » Jacques Duquesne expressed it in this way: « For him, God and man is one and the same. »

Since when? Since his youth.

In 1938, when Karol Wojtyla set out from Wadowice for Cracow to enrol at the prestigious Jagellon university, he soon became the friend of a certain Kotlarczyk, the creator of the Rhapsodic Theatre. He was a disciple of Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), the founder of anthroposophy. This esoteric doctrine is meant to « reconcile Science and Religion. It focuses on Man and on his encounter with Jesus, God-Man. In a world in crisis, it should permit the regeneration of individuals and of society by means of a unifying view of the world and appropriate moral, educative, therapeutic and ecological practices… » The goal is not « to incite man to surpass himself, to attain the stature of a superman, it is rather to help man to find himself again and humanity to unite by means of the “ gnosis ” or spiritual science » (Catholicisme, art. Steiner, 65, 445).

Karol Wojtyla adhered to this esoteric doctrine as a young student and never repented of it. After becoming Cardinal Archbishop of Cracow, he wrote an introduction to the book of Kotlarczyk, his master and friend, “ The Art of the Living Word ”. He exalted in the manner of the Gnostics the action of the word – the poetic, theatrical word –, and the action of the Word – the Word of God –, in the re-creation of human solidarity and in the divinisation of humanity in each of its members. Once he had become Pope, he continued to preach this “ gnosis ”.

His predecessor Paul VI had dreamt of a new Gospel of liberty, equality and fraternity among men. Fr. de Nantes denounced it under the name of Masdu: Movement for the Spiritual Animation of Universal Democracy, which is the transposition of our holy religion and Catholic mystical life into a political combat no longer in the service of the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, but of Humanity, which finds its form of perfect organisation in Democracy. It was a utopia, a messianic dream like that of Lamennais and Sangnier.

With John Paul II, we rose to the superior level of an intellectual “ gnosis ”, which reached the ontological foundations of progressivism, this tremendous heresy of the end times. It was no longer a dream of transforming society projected onto an uncertain future; for the Polish Pope, it had already come about: there existed a divine reality at work in man, in every man, which was not connected as used to be thought to Baptism, to the Eucharist or to any other Sacrament, but which resulted directly, ipso facto, « solo mecano » (Auto-da-fe, He is Risen n° 71), i.e., in a mechanical, automatic way, from the Incarnation: « By His incarnation Christ has united Himself in some fashion with every man.. » (Gaudium et Spes 22, 2) Since God became man, all men are, in some fashion, united to God forever. This is the intoxicating proposition , the “ good news ” that Karol Wojtyla thought that he had the mission to announce to the whole world, in order for every man to discover that he is his own creator and his own redeemer. This is an antichristic doctrine if ever there was one.

Our Father, who analysed every encyclical of John Paul II as they were published – he was the only one in the Church to do so in such minute detail! – was increasingly frightened. « From one encyclical to the next, he wrote, the Pope builds a system without parallel in the Church’s past, especially on the part of a Roman pontiff. This system is the complete dogma, article by article, of a new cult of man, apparently still Christian... in the bovine eyes of moronic or conniving clerics. As for me, I would rather be deaf and blind than not to see and understand this work; I would rather have my right hand cut off and my tongue cut out than forego denouncing this work and demanding that Rome anathematise it, or, failing that, Christ Himself. » (CCR n° 215, p. 1)


On August 15 of the Marian year 1988, John Paul II published his Encyclical Letter “ Mulieris dignitatem ”. Our Father wrote the exhaustive commentary on it in CCR n° 215, of January 1989. The title was already quite a programme: it consisted in extolling the eminent dignity, not of the Virgin Mary, on the feast of Her Assumption, but of “ Woman ” in general and of each woman in particular.

In the very first chapter, in Art. 4, we learn that « the “ fulness of grace ” that was granted to the Virgin of Nazareth, with a view to the fact [?] that She would become “ Theotokos ”, also signifies the fulness of the perfection of “ what is characteristic of woman ” of “ what is feminine ”. We find ourselves, in a sense at the culminating point, the archetype, of the personal dignity of women. »

« As a work of German dialectic penmanship, our Father wrote, it is the inversion of the real through the naturalisation of the supernatural [the Virgin Mary is reduced to being no more than the expression of the feminine Being in itself] in view of supernaturalising the natural [all women are entitled to aspire to the ideal accomplished in the Virgin]. »

The Pope, who wanted to please the world, considered man and woman as two free and equal partners, two “ egos ” set facing one another. They are self-sufficient, autonomous and self-satisfied. All the same, he notes in passing, the origin of woman “ drawn from man’s side ” (Gn 2:21). « Yet of these words he retains nothing. He forgets, therefore, that Eve is of Adam, born of Adam, and thus subjugated from the beginning by this relationship of being, in itself full of love. From this origin, Adam draws his authority and Eve her reverence and obedience; whence proceed a human and Christian morality… »

For the Pope, this morality was obsolete. He claimed that at the origin, in the plan of God, the sexes were equal, that their obviously unjust inequality came from… sin. Yes, it is a consequence of sin, since after sin had been committed, God said to woman: « Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. » (Gn 3:16)

« This “ domination ” indicates the disturbance and loss of the stability of that fundamental equality which the man and the woman possess in the unity of the two: and this is especially to the disadvantage of the woman, whereas only the equality resulting from their dignity as persons can give to their mutual relationship the character of an authentic “ communio personarum ”. »

Ah, if there had been no sin, we would all be free, equal and fraternal persons! Our Father waxed indignant about such a reversal of the whole tradition of the Church: « It is the Demon who is the founder of order, of authority, of conjugal fidelity and of all those good things thought to be divine, but which we now know to be baleful creations and diabolical mirages come into the world through sin!... »


His indignation increased when John Paul II made Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself the apostle of woman’s emancipation. This would be the lesson of the “ Annunciation at Nazareth ”.

« Mary is “ the new beginning ” of the dignity and vocation of women, of each and every woman. [On what conditions? He did not specify, because for him it was an established fact]. A particular key for understanding this can be found in the words that the Evangelist puts on Mary’s lips after the Annunciation, during her visit to Elizabeth: “ He who is mighty has done great things for Me ” (Lk 1:49). These words certainly refer to the conception of Her Son, who is the “ Son of the Most High ” (Lk 1:32), the “ holy One ” of God: but they can also [this is the juxtaposition, the addition of the new, antichristic gnosis to the ancient revelation] signify the discovery of her own feminine humanity… In Mary Eve discovers the nature of the true dignity of woman, of feminine humanity. »

« Poor Blessed Virgin, our Father exclaimed, I beg pardon for so many and for such great blasphemies. You the “ humble handmaid of the Lord ” become the heroine of a raving feminism, with which the Pope is wholly inspired by Lucifer reawakening the flames of old Eve’s revolt and lustfulness and become the great whore of the Apocalypse! »

The goodness that the Heart of Jesus manifested towards women in the Gospel has nothing in common with the adulation that John Paul II bestowed on them. Our Lord had for them « a goodness, a modest reserve and a care that contrasts with the brutality, the open scorn and discriminatory behaviour of Jewish society at that time, at any rate among the Pharisee class – to which the Pope is careful to make not the least allusion. It is also true that He gives proof of an infinite compassion for public sinners, both men and women, who are ostracised whilst He confounds the supposed “ just ” by heroically unmasking their hypocrisy. »

It is also true that during Our Lord’s life, women, in return, displayed a fidelity, a zeal and a devotion even at the foot of the Cross in every way superior to that of men. Our Father, however, pointed out that « what has always appeared in the Church as a gift from the Creator to woman by virtue of her humble condition and her vocation to love and dedication, takes on the aspect of revenge here, the end of a revolution brought to its peak ».

In Art. 17, the encyclical then establishes a skilful balance between virginity and motherhood, « two particular dimensions [sic!]of the fulfilment of the female personality ». In both “ dimensions ”, woman must be given the means to affirm herself as a “ person ”. Why is it always a question of self-fulfilment, by oneself and for oneself, and never of charity, devotedness and sacrifice for one’s neighbour out of love for God?

The Pope added an enormity in the chapter on morality as regards the Epistle to the Ephesians. St. Paul said in fact: « Be subject to one another, in the fear of Christ… » John Paul II made the expression his own while distorting it to bring it in line with his gnosis: it becomes under his pen a “ mutual subjection ”. If « in the relationship between Christ and the Church the subjection is only on the part of the Church, in the relationship between husband and wife the “ subjection ” is not one-sided but mutual. In relation to the “ old ” this is evidently something “ new ”: it is an innovation of the Gospel. »

It is not an innovation of the Gospel; it is rather a Wojtylian innovation that greatly misinterprets the teaching of the Apostles, for St. Paul never told husbands that they had to be subject to their wife but that they had to love her « as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her » (Ep 5:25).

The conclusion of the encyclical is a delirious hymn addressed to Woman, as « the matrix of all this world's good things, human and divine ». These gnostic, Teilhardian terms are intoxicating for some, monstrous for others and « capable of making holy women and children of Mary lose their unique and fervent devotion to the incomparable and unique Immaculate Mother of God! »

In this Wojtylian gnosis, which our Father then demolished entirely with a few words, we are witnessing « a complete transformation from top to bottom of the edifice built through the centuries on the foundation of the Apostles and martyrs in honour of and for the cult of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, and of the Blessed and Immaculate Mary, ever Virgin, Mother of God, blessed among all women. It is a change of owners, whereby all the honours and perfections of Jesus and Mary are transferred and restored to the old Adam and to the old Eve, who are exalted and flattered in the person of every man and of every woman, or rather of Man and of Woman in themselves. At this enticing preaching, each human me, daughter of Eve, son of Adam, slips voluptuously into the adoration and cult of his own being, of his own sex, to oneself, in oneself, and for oneself. »

What a horror that can only lead to damnation!

In order for the whole world to be in tune with it and to prostrate itself before the Beast (Ap 13:4), it is necessary for the Church to become the missionary of this new Gospel.


When the encyclical “ Redemptoris Missio ”, was published on December 7, 1990, for the twenty-fifth anniversary of the conciliar Decree “ Ad Gentes ” on Missions, Fr. de Nantes denounced “ Pope John Paul II’s gnostic unanimism ” for praising the great advancement that humanity was making towards its integral flowering: the “ Civilisation of love ”. Paul VI had uttered the slogan… just when he was turning away from the source of this Love, namely the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Our Father wrote: « To make our traditional religion with its dogma, sacraments, moral law and sacred rites evolve into the new religion of his creation, without losing any of the sanctity and vitality of the former, John Paul II takes the path marked out by his Germanic masters, Kant, Feuerbach, Hegel and Marx, advancing by thesis, dialectic antithesis and synthesis. As we follow its eight chapters, the constant juxtaposition of our religion with the post-conciliar religion, an implacable contradiction of thesis and antithesis, will leave us giddy. Yet, for those prepared to make the effort, the existential synthesis of all these contradictions will eventually reveal a fascinating vision of an integral religion proclaimed in the prophetic terms of Lammenais. It is the religion of the whole man and of all men, that of the future when man and God will reveal themselves as being, from the beginning, but one Christic flesh and one Spirit… » (CCR n° 239, p. 4)

Our Father’s study is at the disposal of whoever wishes to examine it. To the present day, no Roman theologian has risen to defend the Pope against the incredible accusation of “ gnosis ” levelled against him. It is not by “ beatifying ” him next May 1 that will clear him of the accusation. Only the infallible Magisterium of the Church can settle the question.

The Pope’s “ thesis ” consisted in making heartfelt praise for the missions of the past, at least for what remained of them, for « difficulties both internal and external have weakened the Church's missionary thrust towards non-Christians, a fact which must arouse concern among all who believe in Christ. For in the Church's history, missionary drive has always been a sign of vitality, just as its lessening is a sign of a crisis of faith. » (n° 2)

In reality, the conciliar decree on “ Church missionary activity ” was a death-blow dealt to traditional missions. Our Father denounced it at the very moment:

« Wedged among the new dogmas of religious Freedom, Ecumenism, Dialogue and the Construction of Peace, the Schema on the Missions will have to adapt to them and in so doing the missions will die. » (Letter to My Friends 216 of November 11, 1965)

If the souls of pagans no longer need to be saved and led to Heaven, it is pointless to send missionaries.


Well! Yes, it is necessary! Twenty-five years after the baneful decree, John Paul II claimed, in the same Art. 2, to renew missionary dynamism by means of a “ new evangelisation ”. It was a synthesis intended to reconcile everything from the Tradition and from the conciliar Revolution. « What moves me even more strongly to proclaim the urgency of missionary evangelisation is the fact that it is the primary service that the Church can render to every individual and to all humanity in the modern world, a world that has experienced marvellous achievements but that seems to have lost its sense of ultimate realities and of existence itself. “ Christ the Redeemer ”, I wrote in my first encyclical, “ fully reveals man to himself. The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly must draw near to Christ ”. » Remember that this is the mainspring of Steinerian anthroposophy.

« It is important to assure non-Christians, John Paul II continued, and particularly the authorities of countries to which missionary activity is being directed that all of this has but one purpose: to serve man [We shall not be done with it!] by revealing to him the love of God (for him) made manifest in Jesus Christ » Further on, we can read in Art. 3: « Peoples everywhere, open the doors to Christ! His Gospel in no way detracts from man’s freedom, from the respect that is owed to every culture and to whatever is good in each religion… »

The new evangelisation will thus have « but one purpose: to serve man », by revealing to him that « the Gospel in no way detracts from his freedom »! John Paul II then put forward his hidden truth that was to bring about the synthesis for which he was longing, which was no longer Catholic but “ unanimist ”:

« In the process of discovering and appreciating the manifold gifts – especially the spiritual treasures – that God has bestowed on every people, we cannot separate those gifts from Jesus Christ, who is at the centre of God’s plan of salvation. Just as “ by His Incarnation the Son of God united Himself in some sense with every human being…, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in the Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God ” (Gaudium et Spes 22 :2). » (n° 6)

The Pope then developed in eight chapters the consequences of this dynamic presence of Christ and the Spirit in the whole of mankind, in particular by means of religions, ancestral cults, myths and values that are spread everywhere. The new mission would be no more than an optional, revealing extra to a salvation that has already been given and received.

As for inter-religious dialogue, it must, of course, be integrated into the new evangelisation: « In the light of the economy of salvation, the Church sees no conflict between proclaiming Christ and engaging in inter-religious dialogue. » (n° 55) Of course, there is a conflict! The Pope, however, wanted to leave the old controversies about God, Christ, religion and its mysteries on the shelf, since they do nothing but divide. « To dialogue » was tantamount to coming together for the service of any man and for experiencing at last, within a universal democracy, this unanimity, which Christ willed when He said: « May all be one. »

We have passed, however, from the Gospel to anthroposophy, the furthest from real-life experience, in which there are good people and bad people, people who incur damnation and people who save their souls. To succeed in doing this, the Pope smoothed the rough edges off Catholic doctrine: the Cross, the combat against Hell and sin, the necessity of the sacraments… He recommended to missionaries to see their mission of aiding development through to the end, but to do so in such a way as not to infringe in the least on the liberty and dignity of those to whom they are sent.

« To the poor, missionary activity brings light and an impulse towards true development, while a new evangelisation ought to create among the wealthy a realisation that the time has arrived for them to become true brothers and sisters of the poor through the conversion of all [to what? To Christ, to His charity? No!...] to an “ integral development ” open to the Absolute. » (n° 59)

This language is Masonic and gnostic. « That is the grand programme for the future Masdu. Karol Wojtyla is truly the first of the popes ever to have dared to found this “ Movement for the Spiritual Animation of Universal Democracy ” on a Hegelian type metaphysics. It is a transposition, or dreamlike sublimation, of Catholic theology into the ancient gnosis of the great initiates, for whom the divine mysteries are freed of their Christian and Catholic moulds to be revealed as universal. What is said of the Church is secretly said of the whole human race; what is attributed to Christians by virtue of their faith and their baptism is as though already possessed incognito, in the form of “ seeds of the Word ” by every religious man, or “ Gospel seeds ” in every soul of good will concerned for the good of his fellow men and the progress of mankind.

« Of all the gnoses this is the most powerful because it incorporates into its hazy vision all the dogmas and rites of our Church and at the same time inserts them into a general concept of a universe evolving towards general and perfect harmony. “ Seek first the Kingdom of God and His justice and the rest will be added unto you ”, these words of Christ are now made to work for the Antichrist, against Jesus who pronounced them and against the Church who has lived by them for two thousand years… Henceforth, the Kingdom of God is what Jesus regarded as superfluous and what St. Paul considered to be “ the sweepings ”, and God who guarantees its full realisation lives in man and in all men, supremely in the best of men, who, in these days as we approach the third millenium, is undoubtedly John Paul II, whose precursor was Giovanni Battista Montini. » (CCR n° 243, p. 26)

Not content with making him a superstar in his lifetime, now they are preparing to raise him to the altars.

What a lie!


Once the goal – the building of a harmonious, liberal and pluralistic society, adorned with the name of the “ Kingdom of God ” – had been set, measures had to be taken to reach it. This would consist in the defence and illustration of freedom of conscience by each and every person. It was absolutely necessary to believe in it. Thus John Paul II made it the theme of his three Messages for World Peace Day in 1989, 1990 et 1991: “ Freedom of conscience for peace in the world ”. « There is a new world coming into being, sustained by the modern ideal of secular humanism aiming at universal peace through the family of democratic peoples all living together. Today, this family, seeks an effective, legal, executive and judicial Organisation to achieve the new world order, and John Paul II will be its minstrel, prophet and doctrinarian. » (CCR n° 236, p. 1)

Only one sentence of his long message of 1991 caught our Father’s attention: « However much one may remain convinced of the truth of one’s own religion, no person or group has the right to attempt to repress the freedom of conscience of those who have other religious convictions... »

« That statement, our Father wrote, is truly anathema, heretical and schismatic besides, for it pronounces condemnation on God’s holy work in the Old Testament, on the work of Jesus Christ Himself during his public life and on that of the Apostles continued by the regular discipline of the entire Church down to the fatal Vatican Council that placed man’s freedom above the Truth and the Will of God. “ However much one may remain convinced of the truth of one’s own religion… ”, it changes nothing in life, nor does it give the right to upset the peace and calm of those who are in error and on the way to perdition, by trying to save them. The Pope’s subjectivism shows itself to the full here. His religious, philosophical and moral indifferentism is conscious, deliberate, categorical and unrelenting. As far as he is concerned, each man can believe as he likes and everyone is free to imagine that his religion is the only true one or the best...

« No matter what, all men have an equal and absolute right to think, believe and act as their consciences dictate, and no one may discuss the truth or otherwise, the good and the bad of others’ beliefs and religions whether it be to tolerate, condemn or fight them. Karol Wojtyla is so imbued with the cult of man, with faith in man, that there is no trace in him of faith in Jesus Christ or of the cult of God... » (CCR n° 236, p. 8)

Since it was imperative that this defence of freedom extend even to the recognition of conscientious objection, the Pope made it a duty… of conscience for the lawyers meeting in a congress in Rome on March 23, 1991: « If this right [freedom of conscience] was recognised universally as a regulating principle of social relations, confrontations between the various religious, atheistic or agnostic conceptions of the world would remain honest and peaceful. » Our Father then gave a concrete example that shows the folly of such a plea:

« A judge, concerned with the Decalogue and in accordance with the laws of his country, tries a drunkard who had killed his wife, the penalty of which is hanging. The case is too obvious and too threatening for the drunkard. So? The lawyer receives from the Pope the cunning advice of placing between the divine and human Law that arm the judge, and his client the impassable bramble bush of the “ states of conscience ” of the poor wretch – what am I saying? – the impudent assassin and of making the divine and human law yield to the Conscience of the man […]. Since he had been “ conscious ” of ridding the world of an old, useless, harmful madwoman and of doing what is right, the judge, at the insistent petition brought by the lawyer before him, is duty bound to resist the force of the law in order to exculpate this assassin… who is “ enlightened by his conscience ”. » (CRC n° 274, p. 22)


Here is another revealing aspect of John Paul II’s gnosis: in his universe, culture had replaced religion. In the same CRC of June 1991, our Father analysed another speech that the Pope gave at Camerino, on the previous 19 March, to an audience composed of academics, on the theme: “ To create a New Man ”.

« Was this not the dream of so many ideologies that have succeeded one another throughout the centuries? They collapsed at the feet of this man whom each one of us is [if you please], in the strength and fragility of his existence. »

The modern, conciliar Church accepted the challenge. She espoused the world, and from their union a new man was to be born. She claimed to affirm « his primacy », « in the light of God »: « Individual man, as a person, is the supreme reality of the universe. »

Suddenly, blasphemy rang out: « A permanent feature of the social doctrine of the Church is that man must feed himself not only on his “ daily bread earned by the work of his hands… but also on the bread of science and progress, the bread of civilisation and culture ”. »

In fact, the Pope was quoting himself, since this sentence was taken from his encyclical Laborem Exercens, published in 1981. Our Father was beside himself with indignation: « Here, without warning, the Masonic “ Cacangelium ” 1 is substituted for the Gospel in order to get his Satanic message across under the guise of divine teaching! For Jesus Christ, whose Vicar is the Pope who therefore ought to be His spokesman, retorted to the first temptation of the Devil: “ Man does not live by bread alone, but also by all the words that proceed from the mouth of God ”, from His own divine mouth! John Paul II replaces the good of the divine Word, become flesh, become Eucharistic bread, with the adulterated, mortal foods “ of science and progress, of civilisation and culture ”, the stale bread of the Freemasons and its rat poison. He substitutes all of that which, in our sad times, is but wind, vice, corruption and death for divine predestination and the gift of grace, and for Christian sacraments and worship. These are the first heavenly joys, a foretaste of eternal happiness. » (CRC n° 274, p. 14)


As regards happiness, one day before an audience of cardinals John Paul II evoked “ man’s aspiration to happiness as the foundation stone of the faith ”. « It is the most insidiously gnostic text that I have ever read », our Father commented, adding: « I imagine that St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, martyr and Doctor of the Church, experienced this indignation of mine when he read the Gnostics of his time, in the second century, and this same difficulty of distinguishing the true from the false, and the divine from the satanic in the fascinating hymns and equivocal wild imaginings of these great heretics who extoled the “ mysteries ” concealed from the common of the faithful and reserved for the initiated! » (CRC n° 273, p. 9)

If it is a question of Jesus Christ as « the archetype or exemplary model of all given existence », therefore of all happiness, it is irrespective of the Catholic Church, of her sacraments, of her moral and canonical discipline. « Thus everyone who loves as God does can contemplate his destiny that is announced, preformed and, all things considered, already lived out in the mystery of Jesus, Son of God, in the midst of men, in His daily existence, in His death freely accepted and in His victory on Easter morning. Then everyone will be happy with this similarity and this assumption of his destiny into that of the Word Incarnate. In this sacred light, everything is transformed: existence, the world and the flesh itself. »

Yes, but our Christian religion is transposed into pure, universal spiritual values, « without effective implementation, without an undeniably objective work of salvation that allows the Pope’s gnostic preaching to avoid the criticism of quietism, illuminism, and the too real danger of a completely illusory, verbal conversion and faith. These intoxicate the mind but soon prove to be powerless to provide remedies for sin, for the difficulties of life, for sufferings and death, leaving the soul bereft of all grace and of all salutary works at the moment of appearing before its Judge. »

It suffices to come together and organise happiness on earth without speaking about these religions that divide the peoples and undermine the efforts of men in favour of Man, and liberalism will succeed fanaticism. This was the Pope’s project for the year 2000. In order to break the spell and remove any doubt, our Father imagined this dialogue between a member of the CCR and a partisan of the Wojtylian gnosis:

« But it is a speech of a renegade.

Not at all, it is the speech of a wise, inspired man.

– A speech of a Freemason, all the same! Of a Modernist.

Not in the least, but of someone who knows through secret, infused science that all religions touch and embrace one another in their depths that are alone divine.

– Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, the Unique Saviour nevertheless said: “ Without me, you can do nothing ”!

Of course, and it is true! Our ancestral fault, however, was to believe that we alone had His Spirit because we were registered at the church of our parish, and not at the temple or at the mosque! Yet our Pope unceasingly repeats that through His Body, the Son of God physically united Himself to every man, forever, and thus He communicates a portion of His Spirit and His Revelation to everyone and especially to the sages and founders of religions, to the priests of the various cults.

– But St. Paul says that it belongs to us...

John Paul II is our Pope and he says that that is the way things are now.

– I adhere to Jesus Christ forever and I do not want to listen to a renegade Pope!

It’s you who are the renegade! Why don’t you leave the Church and stop disturbing her peace! (CRC n° 274, p. 20)


Well, no! Our Father never left the Church, never! He rather continued his fight against this « evil and dreadful gnosis » by appealing to the infallible Magisterium of the Church. For the third time in 1993, when to his horror he realised that this antichristic gnosis was distilled on all the pages of the new Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The conclusion of this third Book of accusation (reproduced below) has a theological and mystical strength that suffices to distinguish between the adherent to the true Catholic Faith and its contradictor. At the same time, it expresses a moving, heartrending beauty because our Father did not hesitate to write in the first person plural, thus placing himself at the table « of poor sinners » as St. Thérèse of the Child Jesus did, in order to intercede for them. It is a cry from the heart of a man of God who is agonised by the salvation of so many misled souls:

« I owe it to the Truth to tell you clearly what our Book of Accusation shows. Namely, that in this general and universal apostasy, of which this CCC is the instrument and the proof, [...] all, men and nations, absolutely all who adhere today to the faith, the law, the Spirit, the gnostic errancy of this supposed Catholic Catechism, will perish, falling from the divine to the human, from the heavenly to the earthly and finally from the predestination of grace to eternal reprobation.

« No, it is not an anathema, nor a curse, nor a prophecy. It is a forecast and a lament. Like a brother of Cassandra, a Christian Cassandra, I have a foreboding of disaster; in Greek a pathetic mathematic, whence my warning entreaties. This same mathematical rigour that made me reject with horror everything that Congar stood for, all his works and pomps, verified and corroborated by half a century’s experience of things human and divine, impels me to renew my pathetic entreaties to come back from these horrors of errors, from this “ abomination of desolation ” enthroned in the holy Place, in the place of Jesus Christ. For sure, there is still time to detach oneself from it, to oppose it and to be converted before the Wrath of our God erupts over the whole of this immense deception.

« I say this, constrained and forced not for evil but for good: The poison of this new religion is fatal for souls. How, therefore can God thrice holy tolerate its smell and savour? He will vomit out such a mixture of nectar and hellish poison: “ Vade retro, Satana! He exclaims. Discedite, maledicti! ” Do you not see this Wrath and this chastisement already on the way? Are you blind? Are you not yet fearful for a certain future? Then when the hour sounds, it will be too late to save you from it. » (CCR n° 257, p. 3)


Scorning such an entreaty, Pope John Paul II persisted in his gnosis, by signing a new encyclical on 7 October 1993, under the appealing title of “ Splendor Veritatis ”. Our Father said that it should rather have been termed “ Horror Erroris ” – the horror of error. For, even in the introduction, we are confronted with the fundamental dogma of the Wojtylian gnosis:

« The splendour of truth shines forth in all the works of the Creator and, in a special way, in man, [we would have guessed] created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gn 1:26); Truth enlightens man’s intelligence and shapes his freedom, leading him to know and love the Lord. »

John Paul II’s objective was to persuade the whole Church to adhere to his new “ morality of Man ”, dialectically reconciling – at least, he claimed so – modern Liberty and the divine Truth of all time. It was a seemingly impossible task. The Pope, however, was attacked both from the left wing by his “ Anabaptists ”, who flouted all morality and blamed him for having recalled its precepts, and from the right wing by the person who alone had openly opposed the rallying of the Church to modern Liberty, in particular to religious freedom.

« In order to triumph, our Father wrote, the Pope has this cornerstone which consists in these strange words: « The truth gives shape to freedom. He thinks these words are divine, and I hold them to be Satanic. » A great theological duel then got underway. It was decisive because the eternal life or death of millions of souls depended on its outcome (cf. CCR n° 296, p. 1-16 et n° 264, p. 2-22).


From the outset, our Father was victorious, for he proved that John Paul II had committed an enormous misinterpretation of the Scriptures. « Called to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, “ the true light that enlightens everyone(Jn 1:9), people become “ light in the Lord ” and “ children of light ”(Ep 5:8), and are made holy by “ obedience to the truth ” (1 P 1:22). »

These three quotations of St. John, St. Paul and St. Peter are understood in a gnostic sense that their context invalidates. In fact, « St. John no sooner writes: “ The Word was the true light that enlightens every man coming into this world ”, than he immediately bars the way to this fatal gnosis by adding: “ He was in the world and the world was made by Him and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own and His own received Him not. ” So, at the heart of this wicked and condemned world, the Apostle distinguishes those who believe in Jesus Christ, but not blindly – those who believe in His Name, in His intimate mystery which is that of His virginal birth, the sign of His divine generation. It is to them that “ He gave the power to become the sons of God ”! »

When speaking to the Ephesians, St. Paul also segregates the idolaters from the Christians who, through baptism, have become “ light in the Lord ” and “ children of light ”. It formally contradicts the gnostic unanimism with which the Pope saddles him: “ Have nothing in common with them [idolaters]. You were darkness once, but now you are light in the Lord; conduct yourselves as children of light. ” »

At last St. Peter « writes as “ Christ’s Apostle ”, “ to the strangers of the Dispersion ”, that is to the baptised Christians alone who are faithful to the teaching of the Apostles, and, hence “ strangers ” in this world, “ set free by a Precious Blood, as of a Lamb without reproach or stain, Christ ”, Christians therefore dispersed in a pagan world still enslaved to the Evil One ». While, for Pope Wojtyla, any man is « in some fashion » enlightened by the Word and led to obey the truth, i.e. to be free.


In the question put by the rich young man of the Gospel: « Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life? », which forms the framework of the encyclical, the Pope saw the mainspring of the moral search of every man, whatever his belief of unbelief.

« The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly [!] – and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being – must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and his death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter Christ [!] with all his own self; he must “ appropriate ” and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. » (n° 8)

The aim of moral life is to find oneself, and Christ is present to contribute to it.

« If this profound process takes place within him [!], he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God, but also of deeper wonder at himself. »

« The shift is complete, our Father wrote, and the fall total. I understand the tortuous path that leads John Paul II yet again to the autolatry, which is the basis of his person and which he wishes to establish as a universal morality, in all “ freedom ”... based on the “ truth ”. »

Yet just what truth could authorise such freedom! There is some enigma, indeed a mystery in that or else… a deception. « For a hundred years now, Fr. de Nantes wrote, modern society has been marching towards its liberation. Its goal, its ideal, its thrill is to dispense with all authority, law, public coercion, fanaticisms, and commandments, sanctions and fears… Modern man, present-day peoples demand the recognition of their freedom. They want freedom, complete freedom, nothing but freedom. John Paul II, son of the Church and at one with this modern world, swore that he would resolve their problem and tell them the truth that would make the freedom of which they dream accessible in a way that is religious thus absolute, infallible, divine. »

Vatican II attempted the impossible junction, but its declaration “ Dignitatis Humanæ ” was and remains « of no use at all ». John Paul II was aware of it and wanted to establish a definitive metaphysical foundation for the right of the human person to freedom, to show that man – every man! – has received from God all the ingredients of a free act and the ability to go in the direction willed by God without in the least feeling God’s influence as coercion. The entire effort of that enormous encyclical was to attempt to demonstrate it. It could be summed up in a sentence:

« God’s law does not reduce, much less do away with human freedom; rather, it protects and promotes that freedom. »

Or: « Human freedom and God's law are not in opposition; on the contrary, they appeal one to the other. »

Going back to the case of the grandmother who was taken to Bercy by her grandson, our Father expressed the idea: « No problem Grandma! I do what I like because it is God who does just what I like, and that’s good. Anything that bores me is bad! It’s natural; it’s super, overgrand, Alleluia! »


Our Father easily demonstrated the sophism and recalled that there are things that are irreconcilable, for example “ God and Freedom ”. This motto of the liberals of the nineteenth century was ten times condemned by the Popes of the time.

« That man grows in virtue and in the love of God, neighbour and himself through submission to God’s commandments is incontestable. But that he grows in freedom, in the dictionary sense of the word: “ the ability to act or not to act, to choose this or that ”, in full independence, as the world claims as his right, no! Such freedom is the starting point of spiritual conversion and of holiness, and often has to be freed from the slavery of the flesh, of the world and of the Devil into which it has sunk. The goal of conversion, however, is not freedom. Liberation from slavery is not the freedom of the dictionary claimed by Freemasonry; it is another slavery, that of holiness, a worthy and valorous slavery, of love, of piety, of devotion to the Blessed Virgin and adoration of Jesus Christ! » (CRC n° 264, p. 11)

In this Art. 45, the high point of the encyclical, John Paul II staked his all, trying to explain that « the different ways in which God cares for the world and for mankind are not mutually exclusive; on the contrary, they support each other and intersect » … and he lost, in wanting – as our Father accused him – « to integrate the supernatural newness of the Gospel Law entrusted to the teaching Church through to the charism of infallibility proper and exclusive to her, with the natural law, in theory common to all men but in practice corrupted and mangled by the treachery of the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve. » His fantastic and mysterious “ Truth ” which, according to his thinking, was to have “ given its modern and definitive form ” to “ Freedom ” is nothing but an illusion and a betrayal of the very simple Truth that Jesus clearly preached. This truth was quite simply to restore freedom to a mankind fallen into the slavery of sin, the Devil and death.

Hence the envoi:

« Most Holy Father, would you believe it? It is fifty years ago (1944-1994) that I discovered the meaning of this “ intersecting ” of these different “ ways God cares for the world and for mankind ”, which even at that time you were already reflecting on in your anthroposophic gnosis. Desired by you, but execrated by the entire Catholic tradition, of which I am but an unworthy witness and defender, it is the naturalisation of the supernatural with the aim of supernaturalising the natural. Is that not what it is? Your encyclical testifies to that, and this Art. 45 is undeniable and formal proof of it – proof which I submit to your own tribunal, meaning your infallible Magisterium. » (CCR n° 264, p. 18)

This appeal is still pending. The Church one day will give it a fair hearing. In the meanwhile, may the Immaculate Heart of Mary be our refuge, She, « whose Secret is that of a creature forgetful of Herself and preserved for God alone, a creature whom God has magnificently exalted. Her lesson saves us from the mirages of Antichrist, who is the opposite of Her in every way. » (Letter to My Friends n° 179, August 15, 1964).

Brother Thomas of Our Lady of Perpetual Help.
He is risen ! n° 103, april 2011

(1) The term “ cacangelium ” is a neologism that Luther coined to oppose “ evangelium ” (“ good new ”, thus Gospel) from the Greek word “ cakos (bad) ”. “ Cacangelium ” therefore means “ bad news ”. In 1995, our Father gave this definition of cacangelium : “ according to Luther, Jesus pushed man's guilt even deeper than did the Old Testament, situating it in the intimacy of a man's heart, thus revealing man's fatal corruption and damnation.