Vatican II and the eradication of the Tridentine mass


FOTCM Member
I had a very interesting experience not long ago: I went into a church (in SE France) just to visit the place, when there was a mass taking place. And I immediately was kind of transfixed: there was a sheer magnetic pull and I just had to stay for a while. And it was beautiful beyond belief - there was a fantastic organist who really was into the music, which was truly great. And there was a choir (probably made up of members of the congregation), which was gorgeous. The ritual itself felt extremely uplifting: a whole complex choreography performed by the priests who were very much part of the congregation (as opposed to preaching to the congregation), their robes were beautiful, the Latin prayers and music that was intrinsically connected to the whole ritual... magic!

This was unlike anything I have seen in a Catholic mass (I've been to quite a few in different places), so I began noticing some oddities: the congregation was dressed up, not over the top with everyone in black suits or something, just classic sort of conservative clothes. Some women wore hats. No short pants. Quite a few children - they were also dressed up in "Sunday chic". And, no masks! It looked almost like from the 50ies, although a bit more casual. The congregation in any event clearly knew everything and took it very seriously.

So what was going on? It was Monday, so why a mass? Maybe it was a wedding? No, that couldn't be. An ordination? But there was no bishop, and the ritual didn't fit. Then it dawned on me: this must be one of those Catholic groups that still adhere to pre-Vatican II rituals. I heard about them before (they are usually slandered as right-wing nuts, but by now we know what that means...)

I knew some things about all that before, but did a bit of research. Although there were many important theological issues brought up at Vatican II (the council that completely changed the church in the 60ies and after), one of the most important and radical changes concerned the celebration of the mass. They abolished the traditional Tridentine mass in favor of a "modern" mass - what Catholics refer to as "Novus Ordo" ("New Order").

In light of my experience, I thought that there may be something to the Tridentine Mass, something very uplifting for those receptive of such things, which was eradicated on purpose. Apparently, there was sort of a conspiracy among liberal forces at Vatican II - after there had been done lots of preparatory work for the council, as is usually the case (pre-negotiated docuements and the like), they suddenly tossed out all of that during the council and brought in completely new ideas.

There was huge resistance in the church during that time. One important figure was the French cleric Marcel Lefebvre, who still celebrated the old Mass (as did quite a few others). Interestingly, back in the 80ies, Ratzinger (the future pope Benedict II) conceded that the "traditionalists" were allowed to celebrate the pre-Vatican II mass. As a pope, Benedict went further and officially allowed the old Mass. The new pope Francis, by contrast, just recently declared war on the traditional mass. Go figure.

For those interested, here are two videos that show what the "pre-Vatican II" movement is about. Some of it IMO is a bit on the "conservative polemics" side, but I can't help but wonder whether the old Mass, in particular, was something spiritually positive that stood in someone's way. I noticed that among the comments on the videos, many regular catholics have become "traditionalists" because of Covid - the traditional mass was never "shut down" and mask mandates were ignored...

The documentary about Lefebvre is really well-done and fascinating, whether one agrees with everything the "traditionalists" stand for or not.


Michael B-C

FOTCM Member
wonder whether the old Mass, in particular, was something spiritually positive that stood in someone's way.

In light of my experience, I thought that there may be something to the Tridentine Mass, something very uplifting for those receptive of such things, which was eradicated on purpose.
Thank you for your post Luc. It brought back some very powerful memories for me. Am I correct in assuming you are not by birth a Catholic? Well, I'm of a certain generation of birth Roman Catholics who lived this schism in that I was born the year of the infamous Vatican 2's commencement and it finished 3 years later. My family was catholic to its core and both my parents regarded V2 as an abomination - so that by the time I became conscious of such things (late 60s say early 70s) it was still a lived reality. My mother obeyed the church and grudgingly followed the new order but my father never did. To the day he died (5 years ago) he stood in church and quietly (but audibly) spoke/chanted the full Latin mass as the priest attempted to battle his mumbles as he in turned delivered the much watered down 'liberal' new English catechism to the assembled. Some Sunday's my father would get the bit between his teeth and there would ensue a battle of wills and volume to see who could maintain control as well as dignity. Suffice to say the priest normally lost because his tool kit lacked all the power, hypnotic rhythm and strangely wondrous cohesion which the 'alien' seeming language of Latin possessed. It was as if you could apprehend more whilst comprehending less.

As kids we found this excruciatingly embarrassing but we had no choice but to live between both extremes. In his later years he finally tracked down one of these traditionalist priests that you mention still granted a dispensation to say the Latin Mass and even returned to serving at altar as part of his communion with this. It was as if the 'true faith' he had maintained - which was by nature authoritarian - against such a tide of 'liberalism', only took its authority and substance from the Latin text and rite itself; anything else was by its perversion meaningless and verboten. It left a deep imprint on me and having, like you, attended full Tridentine occasions, I was equally struck by the awe, reverence and mystical quality that emerged (and I had a personal love of chimes and incense anyway!) It was theatre of the highest aspiring kind and there's no doubt the biggest reason I went into that 'industry' was to try and recreate or bring back to being in this profane world the 'mystery' of the ancient mass.

The Latin Mass has its antecedents in the temple practices of pre-christian worship. Its connection to true theatre religiously maintained. Theatre was the language of communal communion with the Gods and the living, ever present world of dead ancestors. I think you are spot on when you say there was a deliberate eradication of this ancient link - one of the first ground laying preparations for what was to come (I simply note this event coincides with the assassination of the catholic king, JFK).


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Thanks @luc. I will have to give the videos a watch.

I've been very slowly reading a book by Jean Hani called 'The Divine Liturgy: Insights Into Its Mystery' (originally in French and published in 1981). He touches on the older traditions in his books (I first read his book 'The Symbolism of the Christian Temple' - originally in French and published in 1962), but I was pretty much unaware exactly what he was referring to in terms of the turning away from tradition. Your post fills that in a bit. Since the mass touched you in such a way, you might find the book(s) interesting.

I had intended to start a thread on his books once I finished 'The Divine Liturgy' or at some point when reading his other books that are in English.

Fwiw, when reading his first and now his second book, it often crosses my mind that he may have had some connection to Alchemy or alchemists. His writing gives me an impression that he was a person that knew much more than he was giving in the books and reminds me of Fulcanelli's books, even if the information given is less cloaked from view and mystery. Fulcanelli's books are referenced in his bibliography. Fwiw.



The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Also, Jean Borella is mentioned in Jean Hani's wikipedia post. I just looked at a few of his books.

This one looks like it connects to this topic in a direct way:

'Love and Truth: The Christian Path of Charity'

Love and Truth (Amour et Vérité, 2011), by Jean Borella, is the revised and recast second edition of a book first published in France in 1979 under the title La charité profanée (The Desecration of Charity). The original idea for this book sprang from the author's bewilderment and dismay at seeing, in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, theologians and other Church members call into question or reject some of the fundamental dogmas of the Christian faith, all in the name of a love for humanity! By that time, of course, humanitarian ideology had already made worrisome inroads, having already for two centuries and more extended its unrelenting sway over minds (though sometimes justifiably so). But when it incited both clergy and laity to break with the faith of the Creed itself, this was beyond bearing.

Jean Borella shows how at the core of this "rage" for love then (and still now) animating a Church in the throes of revolution, there festered an illusion--indeed, a perversion--of charity in its inmost essence. But not only this: he likewise shows that to relinquish custody of truth to the keeping of a materialist science would be to ignore the limits and errors of this science, and above all to grow calloused to the doctrinal splendors of the loftiest theological and metaphysical science. Hence the necessity, when dealing with the created world and human beings, to present a concept--new in form if not in its depths--that offers faithful Christians fertile ground to put down roots again. A vast undertaking, yes, but one that has led Borella to discern the strayings of modern man, and to his quest to rediscover beneath that perversion the unique Light shining in the darkness which represents the authentic meaning of Christian charity. Christ has said: only knowledge of the Truth will set us free... and free to love.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
It is also interesting that you started this thread. The last two Sunday's I've gone to a local Catholic church. I was raised Catholic, but hadn't been to mass in years and years.

I haven't been going to church to take part in the mass, but to try and observe some of the things talked about in Hani's 'The Divine Liturgy' firsthand and also some things mentioned in 'The Symbolism of the Christian Temple'.

So I go a little early, say prayers for some people and a few other prayers, and observe the mass while thinking about Paul, Jesus/Caesar, and Laura's new book. It has been grounding in a way and in some way has filled a spiritual void of sorts for me.

Michael B-C

FOTCM Member
There is a documentary on this topic called the Mass of the Ages, which is available for free on the internet.

This is the first part.

MASS OF THE AGES: Episode 1 — Discover the Traditional Latin Mass (4K)

The official website: WATCH — Mass of the Ages
Thank you for posting this Tristan. Yes, it would be easy to see this as no more than a glossy sales pitch for a suspect theology (as Laura's recent book so artfully reveals) but all I see is a beautifully considered, moving, thoughtful and most human film in search of the divine. Even as we descend into hell I am not surprised to see how powerfully and needfully certain people - often young people - are reaching back into tradition for solace and protection from the storm. Dominus vobiscum.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
As a pope, Benedict went further and officially allowed the old Mass. The new pope Francis, by contrast, just recently declared war on the traditional mass. Go figure.

To expand on this point:

Priests currently celebrating Mass according to the old missal must request authorization from their bishop to continue doing so, Pope Francis ordered, and for any priest ordained after the document’s publication July 16, the bishop must consult with the Vatican before granting authorization.

This is earth-shattering to traditionalist and neotraditionalist Catholics because before a Priest could host the Latin/Tridentine Mass at their own discretion. Going forward, they require permission from the Bishop of the diocese. So if someone wanted the Latin Mass they could just go find another Church close by. If one liberal Bishop shuts the mass out of an entire diocese, they would have to travel to a different region entirely for it. Questions of "consulting with the Vatican" raise a lot of concerns about what exactly the criteria are for permitting or denying a Latin Mass are. This is seen by the traditionalist base of the Church as just a stick to force recalcitrant Catholic communities into line over social issues, such as Covid or any other future political pet projects the Catholic Church will be used to promulgate. So if a group refuse to wear masks or get vaccinated for example, the Bishop may retaliate and threaten to pull the traditional mass from their parish. It's using the sacraments of the Church as political tools.


The Living Force
Awesome. This issue has become a lightening rod within the Catholic Church. It has come to the point that even some Archbishops are decrying that Francis himself is a manifestation of the dark side and that the novus ordo is but a hollow facsimile enacted to divert the faithful. (Viganò). Yes the two are so different in tone. The C’s did mention Gregorian chant and that’s what you get in a high mass if it’s traditional.

Think about it. The V2 mass was designed to secularize and supposedly make it more user friendly. The old ways were dissed. “Why is the priest facing away from the congregation? He is excluding the faithful.” But the critics failed to note that all the humans were facing God together versus the modern version where the priest becomes the intermediary between man and god. The music became the local folk music with a smattering of old warhorse hymns that were more Protestant in nature.
When I step in a church I don’t want “accessibility” and John Denver style hymns. I wan mystery and magisterium. I want reverence. I don’t want the priest starting off with stand up comedy to make me relax and feel comfy.
I will stop there but, yes, this is a huge battleground.

The church should be standing up to the new world order, not cheering it on and helping to usher it in. Guys like Viganò are an inspiration. He does not mince words and condemns Francis in no uncertain terms.


The Living Force
To give an idea, here're 2 extracts of a tridentine mass in Latin. Notice the solemnity:

The Church has always celebrated with its back to the people
Today, a liturgical trend is gaining ground, including in the Vatican, to say that the liturgy of the word, during the Mass, should be celebrated facing the people, while the Eucharistic liturgy of the Mass should be celebrated facing the Lord (no face-to-face meeting of the people and priest).
In order to understand this problem, it is essential to read the book written in 2004 and published in French in 2006 by Editions ad solem with a preface by Joseph Ratzinger. The work entitled « Se tourner vers le Seigneur – Essai sur l’orientation de la prière liturgique » ("Turning to the Lord - An Essay on the Orientation of Liturgical Prayer") is a brilliant and thorough synthesis of archaeological, historical, liturgical and theological works on this subject.
The author, Uwe Michael Lang, has done a colossal and erudite job. This book scientifically blows apart the very biased works of certain liturgists who once provided ideological weapons to those who militated for a dogmatized absolutization of the mass celebrated before the people.
The author explains at the outset (p. 24) "An examination of the historical data will show that the common orientation of the priest and the people is widely attested in the early Church and that there was indeed a general custom in this sense.
It will become clear that this common direction in liturgical prayer was a solid tradition in both East and West." Let us specify that "the common direction of the priest and the people" means that they look together in the same direction and therefore that the priest does not celebrate facing the people.
And "p.35 There is no doubt that, from the very first times, it was taken for granted for Christians throughout the known world to pray in the direction of the rising sun, that is to say, towards the geographical east.
It was an eschatological direction of the return of Christ, the Light rising on the world.
And p. 51 "Praying facing east was a determining element for early Christian liturgy and architecture. Established as a rule, the direction of the east decided the position of the celebrant at the altar.
Source (in French): Célébration dos au peuple - SERAPHIM
Last edited:


Dagobah Resident
To give an idea, here're 2 extracts of a tridentine mass in Latin. Notice the solemnity:

There is no doubt that, from the very first times, it was taken for granted for Christians throughout the known world to the direction of the rising sun, that is to say, towards the geographical east. It was an eschatological direction of the return of Christ, the Light rising on the world. And p. 51 "Praying facing east was a determining element for early Christian liturgy and architecture. Established as a rule, the direction of the east decided the position of the celebrant at the altar.

In Latin, this is called 'Ad Orientem'. However, another explanation for the priest having his back to the people is that like Christ (priests are considered to be an 'alter Christi) he is a good shepherd leading his flock. Where the shepherd goes the flock follows.

My late father was, like Niall's, an Irish Roman Catholic who preferred the Old Tridentine Rite over the New Pauline Rite, also known as the Missa Novus Ordo. He was a member of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales. He only ever attended the Tridentine Rite. He also got to meet Archbishop Lefebvre. Indeed, I and my twin brother as 12 year old boys also met him when we served Mass at a Parish Church in England in front of the Archbishop whilst he was visiting England in 1970, at the same time as he was establishing his congregation of the Society of St. Pius X. Quoting from Wikipedia: Marcel Lefebvre - Wikipedia

Ordained a diocesan priest in 1929, he had joined the Holy Ghost Fathers for missionary work and was assigned to teach at a seminary in Gabon in 1932. In 1947, he was appointed Vicar Apostolic of Dakar, Senegal, and the next year as the Apostolic Delegate for West Africa. Upon his return to Europe he was elected Superior General of the Holy Ghost Fathers and assigned to participate in the drafting and preparation of documents for the upcoming Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) announced by Pope John XXIII. He was a major leader of the conservative bloc during its proceedings. He later took the lead in opposing certain changes within the church associated with the council. He refused to implement council-inspired reforms demanded by the Holy Ghost Fathers and resigned from its leadership in 1968. In 1970, he founded the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) as a small community of seminarians in the village of Écône, Switzerland, with the permission of the local bishop.

Archbishop Lefebvre had been the most ultramontane (a clerical political conception within the Catholic Church that places strong emphasis on the prerogatives and powers of the Pope) of bishops and had faithfully served Pope Pius XII in Rome. Indeed, Pius XII held him out as the very model of a good bishop that brought him the dislike of Archbishop Giovanni Montini (later Pope Paul VI). Montini was sacked from the Curia by Pius XII when the pope was advised by the CIA that Montini had been secretly meeting with the communists in Italy for discussions. He was then made Archbishop of Milan and Pius XII said he would only be made a cardinal over his dead body, which is what happened when John XXIII became pope and consecrated Montini as a cardinal.

One of the reasons why Archbishop Lefebvre was such an opponent of the Second Vatican Council was that he was one of the the secretaries to the Council, which had been called by John XXIII, and should under Canon Law have been prorogued on the pope's death in June 1963. However, it wasn't and the Council's agenda would be changed after John XXIII's death without the Archbishop being consulted. Hence, it came as a shock to Lefebvre and others when the Council (which had primarily been called to discuss the concerns around Catholics living behind the Iron Curtain and in communist China etc.) switched track and started discussing issues like 'religious liberty'. I should add that the Second Vatican Council never discussed a new rite of mass in the vernacular. Indeed, it upheld the continuance of the Roman Rite of Mass in the Old Tridentine Rite in Latin. Pope Paul's Novus Ordo was introduced solely by his own papal authority. When he had circulated the New Rite (drawn up by Monsignor Bugnini) to all the bishops of the church, the vast majority wrote back with objections to it. Paul VI overrode these objections and promulgated his new Rite in 1969. See Mass of Paul VI - Wikipedia.
Inexplicably Paul VI, chose to wear the Jewish High Priest's Ephod when promulgating the New Rite. No one has ever explained why he did so. There are many who believe he was a secret Freemason and from a Sephardic Jewish family. If you want to know more about this, his masonic links are explored in a book by Father Luigi Villa called 'Paul VI Beatified?' published by The Apostolate of Our Lady of Good Success ISBN: 978-0-615-41756-1.

I attach a link to an article giving you some idea of the bitterness the abolition of the Old Rite has brought in its wake, as endured first hand by Niall's father. Pope Francis has now reopened these wounds. See The Facts about "Pope" Paul VI.

There was no doubt some personal animosity existing between Paul VI and Archbishop Lefebvre, who was for ever afterwards painted as the rebel bishop and would subsequently be excommunicated by Pope John Paul III in 1988 for consecrating four bishops against the express prohibition of the Pope. The excommunication would later be rescinded by Pope Benedict XVI after Lefebvre's death. I remember one of the Irish brothers who taught me as a young lad saying that Lefebvre was the modern St. Athanasius, who was excommunicated three times when opposing the Arians. See: Athanasius of Alexandria - Wikipedia. As the C's have said, history runs in cycles, so some events replay themselves time and again I guess. Perhaps it was so with the Sons of Belial and the Sons of the One as well?

At this distance in time, one can see the Second Vatican Council now as being a revolution in the Church, comparable to the secular French and Russian Revolutions. My own feeling is that Pope Francis is a creature of the New World Order and has a mandate to finish the work of the reformers of the Second Vatican Council. I suspect he will move, if he has time (since he may be dying of bowel cancer), to introduce some sort of new pantheistic rite to transform the Catholic Church into the New World Order Church. If you think I am kidding about this see below:

On 4 October 2109, Pope Francis attended an act of idolatrous worship of the pagan goddess Pachamama. He allowed this worship to take place in the Vatican Gardens, thus desecrating the vicinity of the graves of the martyrs and of the church of the Apostle Peter. He participated in this act of idolatrous worship by blessing a wooden image of Pachamama.


Welcome back to the Mother Goddess folks!

However, how long has there been a plot to infiltrate and take over the Catholic Church by the New World Order. I recently posted an article on the Alton Towers thread about the The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and the Harran Colony - see Alton Towers, Sir Francis Bacon and the Rosicrucians, which cited an article by Tracy R Twyman on a strange neo-Catholic Masonic group called the Hieron of Val d'Or. She sought to make link between the Hieron and The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. In my article, I sought to focus on what she had said about the Heiron and linked it to the Rosicrucians in the form of the Martinist organisation - a form of Catholic Freemasonry with Rosicrucian elements. This has relevance to the true mystery of Rennes-le-Chateau and the priest at the centre of the mystery, Abbe Berenger Sauniere, who many researchers suspect of being both a Martinist and a member or supporter of the Hieron of Val d'Or. What I did not post there was what Twyman had to say about the Second Vatican Council and the forces behind it, as it was not relevant to what I was discussing in the article. I now set it out here, however, because it is highly relevant to what has been discussed on this thread.​

The Protocols of Zion and The Hieron du Val d’Or
by Tracy R. Twyman
Oct 19, 2004
from DragonKeyPress Website
recovered through BibliothecaAlexandrinaWayBackMachine Website

Another interesting figure who appears to have been involved with the Hieron is a traditionalist Catholic philosopher who also took an interest in Eastern and Islamic mysticism. He was one of Julius Evola’s good friends, and they shared an interest in the Holy Grail, as well as the symbolism of the Black Sun, Agartha, and the ‘Lord of the World”, which Guenon wrote about extensively. Julius Evola was also considered a “traditionalist.”

He advocated a united European empire, ruled by a sacred monarchy, and based upon spiritual principles.

His views appear to be entirely in line with those of the Priory of Sion, as expressed by their front organizations the Hieron du Val d’Or, and later, Alpha Galates. It seems likely, then, that Evola could have been a member of the Hieron, and therefore that Guenon was as well. Author William Kennedy has found a great deal of evidence linking Guenon to the Hieron.

In his articles, “Rene Guenon and Roman Catholicism”, published in Volume 9, Number One of The Journal of Traditional Studies, he writes:

“… Guenon became involved with the Catholic historian and archeologist Louis Charbonneau-Lassay… an authority on medieval Christian symbolism, specializing on the various fantastical beasts that appeared in medieval art. For Guenon, Charbonneau-Lassay was authoritative on all matters of symbolic interpretation.

Charbonneau-Lassay’s work appeared in the Catholic journal, Regnabit, run by the controversial writer and oblate priest Pere Felix Anizan. The fact that Anizan was under constant suspicion by the French authorities of being a monarchical conspirator seeking to restore the House of Bourbon in France did not deter Charbonneau-Lassay from publishing in the new journal or from suggesting that Guenon also submit articles to it.

“Regnabit… was merely the propaganda organ of an organization called the Hieron du Val d’Or…”

William Kennedy’s assessment of the Hieron includes detail that identify them even further with the ideals of Alpha Galates. In the Alpha’s official publication, Vaincre, they write about the solar religion of Atlantis, calling it the basis for Christianity and the only true spiritual tradition. [
MJF: N.B. that Pierre Plantard was the 22 year old founder and Editor of Vaincre during the Vichy Regime of Marshal Petain (1940-44).]

Similarly, Kennedy writes that the Hieron du Val d’Or:

“…sought to demonstrate that Christianity was in fact a primordial revelation which could be traced to antediluvian Atlantis and sought to form a brotherhood dedicated to the promotion of a universal sacred symbolism. The Hieron was also adamantly anti-Masonic and sought to reform this brotherhood according to Christian principles.”

The last above-quoted sentence is particularly interesting because in the Dagobert’s Revenge article “Between the Swastika and the Cross of Lorraine”, I document how Alpha Galates was also anti-Masonic, yet shared a similar goal of the ultimate “reformation of the freemasonries.”

In the same article, William Kennedy details Guenon’s relationship with another Catholic scholar whose views seem, on the surface at least, in direct opposition to those of the Hieron.

His name was Jacques Maritain, who, as Kennedy writes:

“…influenced an entire generation of Catholic intellectuals. Maritain was a major figure responsible for the democratization of the Church which came to fruition after the Second Vatican Council.”

This is interesting, since Maritain was also good friends with Jean Cocteau.

It was Maritain who was responsible for Cocteau’s re-conversion to Catholicism, and the two published a book full of their letters to one another on the subject of God. Maritain had first become acquainted with Cocteau’s work when a disciple named Charles Herion gave him a copy of Cocteau’s pamphlet Le Coq et l’Arlequin.

Herion soon became ordained as a priest, and it was from him that Cocteau took the sacraments for the first time since his childhood, during the Feast of the Sacred Heart. This “Sacred Heart” symbol played a large part in Cocteau’s passionate conversion.

According to William Emboden, when Cocteau was introduced to Father Herion, he:

...looked at the swarthy priest wearing a cloak with a red cross above a red heart - the symbol of his order - and all but swooned as he dropped into the arms of the church".

When he wrote afterwards of Father Herion as an angel in costume, we cannot help but look back to the opium drawings of only months earlier with the theme of the angel with the heart on his chest...

Cocteau was now in the same ‘club’ as Picasso and Stravinsky; he had converted back to Catholicism.”

Indeed, it would appear that Cocteau was already a member of a club that included those two, specifically, the Priory of Sion.

The Sacred Heart symbol which so attracted him, and which had been a theme of his art even prior to his conversion, was a symbol used by the Hieron du Val d’Or.

Is it possible that both Maritain and Herion were members of the Hieron, despite Maritain’s obvious left-wing stance on Church issues? The Priory of Sion has never had a clear-cut position on the subject of Catholicism. They appear to have been involved in many anti-church movements over the centuries, but also many right-wing and traditionalist movements. Their membership has included clerics and Catholic spokesmen on both sides of the political spectrum, and the stances of these individual members have at times not been clear either.

The same can be said about many of Cocteau’s friends. One of the strangest acquaintances of his was Cardinal Jean Danilou, described in The Messianic Legacy as “the Vatican’s chief spokesman at the time on clerical celibacy.”

This man was mysteriously found dead with a stripper one day, purportedly after becoming involved with the scandalous P2 Mason lodge. Interestingly, Danilou had translated Cocteau’s play Oedipus Rex in Latin. And while it has not been proven, Cocteau has been purportedly linked with Pope John XXIII, who inaugurated the Second Vatican Council. He was one of the most liberal and most mystical of modern popes, and was linked by contemporaries with Rosicrucianism.

One of the major things linking him with Cocteau was that when he took on the Grand Mastership of the Priory of Sion, he also took on the title “Jean 23
*.” In I speculated that Cocteau may have been presiding over what was essentially an internal Vatican coup orchestrated by the Priory to reform the Church from within according to Vatican principles.

[*The previous Pope John XXIII had been declared an anti-pope, so it was an odd choice on that count too.]

Was this, then, the original intent behind the Second Vatican Council? We may never know, but the Priory of Sion’s involvement with the various radical and reactionary Catholic movements (as well as anti-Catholic movements) demonstrates that they certainly believe they have the right to claim the Church, and Christ himself, as their own.

What provides the motivation for this apparent conviction is open to debate.

Please note that the modern Priory of Sion, created by the fraudster Pierre Plantard, was in my view really a smokescreen for the Rosicrucians, since there really had been a medieval order called the Priory of Sion (as Laura discovered) founded by an obscure group of Augustinian Canons in Jerusalem at their Church of Notre Dame de Sion, where the original nine knights who founded the Knights Templar may have acted as guards, like modern Levites. The Order later went by the alternative name of "Ormus",

I think that Plantard, who had a fascinating history with the Vichy regime and the French Resistance, De Gaulle and right-wing Catholic movements both pre and post-war, may have been involved with the Rosicrucians as well. Is there any evidence for Cocteau's involvement with the Rosicrucians though? Yes there is and it is hiding in plain site in London:​


The ‘Cocteau Chapel’ at Notre Dame de France Church, London

See: Alton Towers, Sir Francis Bacon and the Rosicrucians

See also Niall McDevitt's article: On Jean Cocteau’s Crucifixion | IT ( for a full discussion of this work.

The beautifully coloured line drawing—Cocteau was a gifted line-drawer as well as poet, novelist, dramatist, filmmaker etc. — is arguably more striking for what is not there than for what is. Conspicuous by his absence is the King of the Jews, or at least his head, torso, and arms. All we see on the cross are his legs: knees, shins and feet. The feet bleed onto a giant rose below. Here is our first clue: the rose and cross. Cocteau—like his musical friends Debussy, Satie and Piaf —was associated with (wait for it) L’Ordre de la Rose+Croix Catholique et Esthetique du Temple et du Graal i.e., The Catholic and Aesthetic Order of the Rose+Cross, the Temple and the Grail. These are the Rosicrucians, a type of arty Freemasonry, devotees of the sacred feminine and open to female members. It is thought Francis Bacon originated the movement, for Protestants, in the 17th century. 400 years ago they were all the rage in England and on the continent. Later members included Yeats whose poetry is studded with Rosicrucian images such as ‘Our Father Rosicross is in his tomb’.

The name of the church Notre Dame de France is also confusing. Who is Our Lady of France? It’s often thought that Notre Dame churches are really consecrate to Jesus’s closest disciple and alleged consort, Magdelene, and not his mother. Many stem from the Middle Ages when the Magdelene cult was at its former zenith. The two Oxbridge Colleges, Magdelene and Magdelen (prounounced ‘maudlin’), testify to her popularity then. Legend has it that Magdelene and two other Marys—not including the Virgin—sailed to France following the
crucifixion and landed at the town of Saintes Maries de la Mer (Holy Marys of the Sea). Magdelene is reputed to be buried in the Basilica of St. Maximin in the South of France. Our Lady of France is thus less ambiguous: it can only mean Magdelene.

Was Cocteau really the head of the Priory of Sion/the Roscicrucians. I doubt it but then Sir Francis Bacon was supposedly the head of the early 17th Century Rosicrucians and he was one of the leading scientists, writers and philosophers of his age in some ways like Cocteau.

However, what I do know is that there were definitely very powerful forces at work who persuaded Pope Benedict to step down as supreme pontiff (he is still alive and going strong though at 95) allowing Pope Francis to take his place. These forces included: George Soros, Henry Kissinger, President Barak Obama, Hilary Clinton (then US Secretary of State), Angela Merkel and John Podesta.

Need I say more! Indeed, President Donald Trump was given a letter signed by four concerned Catholic US senators who wanted the whole affair investigated because of the involvement of prominent US figures. I understand that the so called traditional Catholic William Barr (Trump's Attorney General) was tasked with looking into the matter. Nothing came of it of course. It is interesting to note that Barr himself was an employee of the CIA and his father, Donald Barr, served in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II. Barr's father was Jewish and raised in Judaism but later converted to Christianity and joined the Catholic Church.

When Pope Benedict resigned he did so by signing a Declaratio in Latin formalizing his resignation from the pontifical office. It contained over 40 basic mistakes though, which for a man who was a theologian, a seminary professor and acknowledged Latin expert, seems highly unusual. Was Benedict trying to send a signal by doing so?

The Cassiopaeans have told us that there is an organisation called the Quorum that oversees, amongst other things, prophecies. These no doubt include Biblical prophecies such as those in the Book of Daniel and St John's Apocalypse. However, there is a huge body of Catholic prophecies involving saints and mystics, many of whom claimed to see the age we are now living in - the so called 'End Times'. These include St Malachi, St Francis of Assisi, St. Hildegard von Bingham, St Bridget of Sweden and Blessed Anna Maria Taigi – a Mystic, Healer and Prophet, to name but a few.

St. Francis saw a vision of two popes, one he called the black and one he called the white. Interestingly, the head of the Jesuit Order is normally called the 'Black Pope'. Well Pope Francis is the first Jesuit Pope in history, so is this what St. Francis intended to convey - bearing in mind that his life preceded the founding of the Jesuit Order by several hundred years?

Blessed Anna Maria Taigi is of particular interest here though, since she is a rare example of a Catholic lay female saint and had numerous visions of the future:​

A housewife and mother of 7 children in Rome who was gifted with extraordinary visions and revelations about the Latter Times and the future chastisement. The secular tertiary Anna Maria Taigi (1769-1837) also speaks of the Great Monarch in the famous prophecy of the “three days of darkness”, of which we report an extract: “ France will fall into appalling anarchy. The French will have a desperate civil war in which the old will also take up arms.

From age 24, Ana Maria Taigi often had before her eyes a "mystical sun," a supernatural orb-shaped light that allowed her to see state of consciences, the revolutions and wars, the aims of secret societies, the rewards of the good and punishments of the bad. In it various times she saw the Latter Times, the great chastisement that would cleanse the earth and the Church, the destruction of the Revolution, and the “restorer” who would lead a victory more splendid than has ever been achieved before. She had a good track record for prophecies that were fulfilled:

In his work The Latter Times, Fr. Martin Sanchéz notes that in her times Blessed Ana Maria was consulted by Kings, nobles, Bishops and even Popes. He lists several of the multitude of fulfilled prophecies made by Ana Maria Taigi to assure us of the confidence we can place in those regarding the Latter Times:

  • She predicted the abdication of Charles IV, King of Spain, the fall of Napoleon, the date of the liberation of Pope Pius VII, the assassination of the Father General of the Trinitarian Order (she was a member of its Third Order);
  • She knew about the time and date of the death of Napoleon;
  • Czar Alexander I converted before he died, seen by Blessed Taigi in her orb;
  • She announced a terrible plague that would break forth in Rome as a chastisement from God on the day after her death;
  • She foretold the death of the Czar Alexander I to a Russian general who visited her one day before the news came to Rome; she also said that his soul had been saved because he had died a Catholic and protected the Pope and the Church. In fact, shortly before he died in 1825, Alexander I converted to the Catholic Faith.
czar nicholas

Czar Alexander I

During the last 25 years of her life, Msgr. Raffaele Natali, a trusted priest and secretary of the Chambermaster of Pius VII, recorded her prophecies and ecstasies in more than 4,000 handwritten pages.

When Ana Maria Taigi spoke of the continuing disorder in the Church and society, she used the word Revolution. She warned that when iniquity would parade openly and the Revolution would triumph, there would be a great chastisement that would come unexpectedly and destroy the impious and the enemies of the Church.

In the testimony of Msgr. Natali in the beatification process, he relates the words of the Seer about the Latter Times:

"Things will be so convulsed that man would no longer be able to put things in order, but the omnipotent Arm of the Lord will remedy everything. She told me that the great scourge of the earth had been mitigated, but not that of Heaven, for it would be horrible, shocking and universal." Truly, the universal nature of the coming chastisement makes it a "Judgment of Nations."

That great Chastisement would occur long after the holy people of her epoch had been buried, he continued. "It will arrive unexpectedly and in it the wicked will be destroyed. I saw the earth enveloped in flames, many buildings crumbling, the earth and Heaven seemed to be in agony.

"Many millions of men will die by steel, some in wars, others in conflicts, and millions more by unforeseen death, and this throughout
the whole world. As a result, entire nations will return to the unity of the Catholic Church, many Turks, Gentiles and Hebrews will be converted in a way that will surprise Catholics, who will be amazed by the fervour and observance they will show in their lives.

"In short, she told me that the Lord wanted to purge the world and His Church, and for that He had prepared a new crop of souls who, unknown, would appear to perform great works and surprising miracles. She told me that after the Lord had cleansed the earth with wars, revolutions and other calamities, Heaven would begin [its chastisement].

"For, at the end of this scourge, there would be a general convulsion of shocking meteorological phenomena with many deaths. The Servant of God told me several times that the Lord showed her in the mysterious sun the universal triumph of the renewed Church, by a manner so great and surprising that she could not describe it. ”

Three days of darkness

Blessed Ana Maria Taigi also describes the “Three Days of Darkness” that she saw in her “mystical sun:”

"There shall come over the whole earth an intense darkness lasting three days and three nights. Nothing will be able to be seen, and the air will be laden with pestilence which will claim mainly, but not only, the enemies of Religion. It will be impossible to use any man-made light during this darkness, except blessed candles.


Convulsions of the earth and signs in the sky

"He, who out of curiosity, opens his window to look out, or leaves his home, will fall dead on the spot. During these three days, people should remain in their homes, praying the Holy Rosary and begging God for mercy. All the enemies of the Church, known and unknown, will perish over the whole earth during that universal darkness, with the exception of a few whom God will soon convert. The air shall be infected by demons who will appear under all sorts of hideous forms."

She goes on to tell how the three days will end with a triumph of Heaven:

“After the three days of darkness, Saints Peter and Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach throughout the world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the future Pontiff. ... There shall be innumerable conversions of heretics, who will return to the bosom of the Church; all will note the edifying conduct of their lives, as well as that of all other Catholics. Russia, England and China will come to the Church."

Sounds a bit like the state of things just before the Wave comes!

I am not asking anyone to believe any of this, of course, but I am posting it here just to show you that many traditionalist Catholics are aware of such prophecies and are under no illusions about the age they are living in and why this has affected the Church.

As to the 'Thee Days of Darkness'. Laura once raised this issue with the C's concerning reported apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Conyers Green in the USA in the 1990's. See: Conyers Apparitions of the Virgin Mary - New Georgia Encyclopedia . I can't track down the session in which this was brought up but the C's made the point not to focus on this matter so much and all of the "really big bangs".

Session 7 June 1997:
A: There too, one is lead astray by substance... Remember our little dissertation about all the really big bangs?

Q: Yes.... I remember... and I got a lot of flack from that... The three days of darkness, et cetera... the implications... let's back up...

However, from memory, I don't think they ever said there would not be three days of darkness prior to the arrival of the wave but not to get hung up on it.

Then there are the visions of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich who also had a mysterious prophecy concerning two popes:

April 12, 1820

“I had another vision of the great tribulation. It seems to me that a concession was demanded from the clergy which could not be granted. I saw many older priests, especially one, who wept bitterly. A few younger ones were also weeping. But others, and the lukewarm among them, readily did what was demanded. It was as if people were splitting into two camps…”

May 13, 1820

“I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . .

I saw how baleful (harmful) would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome). The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness…”

“Then the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches closed down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took violent action. But it did not last long…”

“Once more I saw that the Church of Peter was undermined by a plan evolved by the secret sect
[Freemasons], while storms were damaging it. But I saw also that help was coming when distress had reached its peak. I saw again the Blessed Virgin ascend on the Church and spread her mantle [over it].”

July, 1820

I saw the Holy Father surrounded by traitors and in great distress about the Church. He had visions and apparitions in his hour of greatest need. I saw many good pious Bishops; but they were weak and wavering, their cowardice often got the upper hand…Then I saw darkness spreading around and people no longer seeking the true Church.”
August to October, 1820

“I see more martyrs, not now but in the future…I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church. Near them I saw a horrible beast coming up from the sea… All over the world, good and devout people especially the clergy were harassed oppressed and put into prison. I had the feeling that they would become martyrs one day.”

“When the Church had been for the most part destroyed, and when only the sanctuary and altar were still standing, I saw the wreckers enter the Church with the Beast. There they met a Woman of noble carriage who seemed to be with child because she walked slowly. At this sight, the enemies were terrorized, and the Beast could not take but another step forward. It projected its neck towards the Woman as if to devour her, but the Woman turned about and bowed down [towards the altar], her head touching the ground. Thereupon, I saw the Beast taking to flight towards the sea again, and the enemies were fleeing in the greatest confusion…. Then, I saw in the great distance great legion approaching. In the foreground I saw a man on a white horse. Prisoners were set free and joined them. All enemies were pursued. Then, I saw that the Church was being promptly rebuilt, and she was more magnificent than ever before….”

August 10, 1820

“I see the Holy Father in great anguish. He lives in a palace other than before [notice how Pope Benedict XVI no longer lives in the Papal residence?] and he admits only a limited number of friends near him. I fear that the Holy Father will suffer many more trials before he dies. I see that the false Church of darkness is making progress and I see the dreadful influence it has on the people. The Holy Father and the Church are verily in so great a distress that one must implore God night and day…”

“I have been told to pray much for the Church and the Pope… The people must pray earnestly for the extirpation (rooting out) of the dark church.”

“Last night I was taken to Rome where the Holy Father immersed in his sorrow, is still hiding to elude dangerous demands (made upon him). He is still very weak, and exhausted by sorrows, cares and prayers. He can now trust but few people. That is mainly why he is hiding. But he still has with him an aged priest who has much simplicity and godliness. He is his friend and because of his simplicity they did not think it would be worth removing him. But this man receives many graces from God. He sees and notices a great many things which he faithfully reports to the Holy Father. It was required of me to inform him while he was praying, of the traitors and evil doers who were to be found among the high ranking servants living close to him, so that he might be made aware of it.”

September 12, 1820

“I saw a strange church being built against every rule…No angels were supervising the building operations. In that church, nothing came from high above…There was only division and chaos. It is probably a church of human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the new heterodox Church of Rome [one world church of the False Prophet], which seems of the same kind…”

“I saw again the strange big church that was being built there (in Rome). There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints and other Christians. But there (in the strange big church) all the work was being done mechanically (i.e., according to set rules and formula). Everything was being done, according to human reason. I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed to be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of a cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said: ‘Do build it as solid as you can; we will put it to the ground’.”

“I saw that many of the instruments in the new Church, such as spears and darts, were meant to be used against the living Church. Everyone dragged in something different: clubs, rods, pumps, cudgels, puppets, mirrors, trumpets, horns bellows – all sorts of things. In the cave below (the sacristy) some people kneaded bread, but nothing came of it; it would not rise. The men in the little mantles brought wood to the steps of the pulpit to make a fire. They puffed and blew and laboured hard, but the fire would not burn. All they produced was smoke and fumes. Then they broke a hole in the roof and ran up a pipe, but the smoke would not rise, and the whole place became black and suffocating. Some blew the horns so violently that the tears streamed from their eyes. All in this church belonged to the earth, returned to the earth. All was dead, the work of human skill, a church of the latest style, a church of man’s invention like the new heterodox church in Rome.”

Was it the present time she was seeing?

One can dismiss these visionaries and their prophecies but there is nevertheless a long history of such mystics operating within the Church right down to the present age. Indeed, I recall that Laura was particularly impressed by the German 20th Century mystic Therese Neumann (1898-1962) a Mystic, Stigmatist and Victim Soul, who warned of the rise of the Nazis in the 1930's.​
Last edited:


The Living Force
As to the 'Thee Days of Darkness'. Laura once raised this issue with the C's concerning reported apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Conyers Green in the USA in the 1990's. See: Conyers Apparitions of the Virgin Mary - New Georgia Encyclopedia . I can't track down the session in which this was brought up but the C's made the point not to focus on this matter so much and all of the "really big bangs".

It's just a minor point but your memory isn't quite right on this one as you are conflating two different sessions into one.

The session about (among other things) the apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Conyers Green in the USA in the 1990's was on November 16, 1994 but this one contains no mention of the three days of darkness.

Those three days of darkness are mentioned in session January 27, 1996 as follows but that one has nothing on the Conyers Green apparitions:

Q: (L) Could you comment on the source of this book: "Three days of Darkness," by Divine Mercy?

A: Source?!?

Q: (L) Well, is there going to be 3 days of darkness in 1998 like it says?

A: Why does this continue to be such a popular notion? And, why is everyone so obsessed with, are you ready for this, trivia...? Does it matter if there is three days of darkness?!? Do you think that is the "be all and end all?" What about the reasons for such a thing?... at all levels, the ramifications? It's like describing an atomic war in prophecy by saying: "Oh my, oh my, there is going to be three hours of a lot of big bangs, oh my!!"

Q: (L) Well, you didn't say it wasn't going to happen in the fall of 1998. Is it?

A: First of all, as we have warned you repeatedly, it is literally impossible to attach artificially conceived calendar dates to any sort of prophecy or prediction for the many reasons that we have detailed for you numerous times. {Note: the 'fluid' nature of the future. Probability, etc.} And we have not said that this was going to happen.

Q: (L) I know that you are saying that this 3 days of darkness is trivial considering the stupendous things that are involved in realm crossings. But, a lot of these people are interpreting this as just 3 days of darkness.. then wake up in paradise. I would like to have some sort of response to this question.

A: Trust us to lead you when and how it is appropriate. You should already know that to attempt apply 3rd density study and interpretations to 4th density events and realities is useless in the extreme... This is why UFO researchers keep getting 3 new questions for every 1 answer they seek with their "research." If you will trust us, we will always give you not only the most correct answers to each and every inquiry, but also the most profound answers. If the individual does not understand, then that means they are either prejudiced, or not properly tuned in.

The short snippet you quoted from session June 7, 1997 is rather misleading in this regard - though no mistake on your part of course.


Dagobah Resident
Thank you for putting me right on this point. I must confess that I tried to find the earlier quote in the Transcripts before making a reference to it but could not locate the session, only the later quote. Hence, I had to rely on my memory and, as you say, I mistakenly conflated statements from two different sessions. I wish at times I had a photographic or eidetic memory. It is interesting that the C's say the Lizards were behind the Conyers Green apparitions. As far as I am aware, the Church has never given any legitimacy to those apparitions. As for the Divine Mercy - I assume Laura was referring to the apparitions of Christ experienced by the Polish nun, Sr. Maria Faustina Kowalska (1905-1938), which commenced in 1931? See: Faustina Kowalska - Wikipedia. However, if anyone knows better, please feel free to correct me.​


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I must confess that I tried to find the earlier quote in the Transcripts before making a reference to it but could not locate the session, only the later quote.​

Thanks to a member, to this regard, there is a very useful tool here:

  • Like
Reactions: MJF


Dagobah Resident
Thanks to a member, to this regard, there is a very useful tool here:

Thanks for the tip.
Top Bottom