Washington, D.C.: “Rome on the Potomac” – Jesuits and the American Revolution – Lorenzo Ricci, America’s Least-Known Founding Father
The ‘American’ Masonic Cup – filled with Jesuitical and Vatican sap
It would be a mistake to think that the Jesuits took control of the entire Masonic organization in the 1780s. There is a great degree of autonomy among the various lodges. Hence, we find that when Weishaupt’s Illuminati was accepted by the lodges in the alliance of 1782, this did not necessarily mean that every lodge was suddenly Illuminized – not even all of the lodges in Europe itself.
In fact, this seems to have begun a struggle between two groups for the heart and soul of Masonry. As time passed, it became obvious that it was a struggle between the Jewish/Protestant interests and the Catholic interests, both of whom wanted to harness Masonry for their own purposes. The Jewish influence upon Masonry was by far the earliest. The Catholic-Jesuit influence was brought in primarily in the 1780s through Weishaupt posing as a rabidly anti-Catholic, anti-Jesuit Mason.
Masonry itself existed in various forms for a long time, but the year 1717 was the beginning of its modern form. Nesta Webster states on p. 103 of Secret Societies and Subversive Movements,
“This was followed in 1717 by the great coup d’état when Grand Lodge was founded, and Speculative Masonry, which we now know as Freemasonry, was established on a settled basis with a ritual, rules, and constitution drawn up in due form. It is at this important date that the official history of Freemasonry begins.”
The first “Constitutions” of the Masonic Order were formulated by Dr. Anderson in 1723. On pages 129 and 130, Webster continues,
“The principal founders of Grand Lodge were, as we have seen, clergymen, both engaged in preaching Christian doctrines at their respective churches. It is surely therefore reasonable to conclude that Freemasonry at the time of its reorganization in 1717 was Deistic only in so far that it invited men to meet together on the common ground of a belief in God…. Prayers in the lodges concluded with the name of Christ. These passages were replaced much later by purely Deistic formulas under the Grand Mastership of the free-thinking Duke of Sussex in 1813.”
Freemasonry at its beginning was largely Protestant in its philosophy of religious freedom and of its twin sister, political freedom. These concepts are expressed in the basic principles of democratic government. Protestants joined forces with Jewish interests, since both considered the Roman Church as their common enemy. For this reason, Jewish Cabalism greatly influenced Masonic teachings and ritual, though not as much in Protestant circles per se.
In 1738, Catholics were banned from joining the Masonic Order by Pope Clement XIII in his bull, In Eminenti. Any Catholic who remained a member of the Masonic Order was subject to excommunication (at the Pope’s discretion). Most Catholic Masons chose to ignore the papal bull. This prohibition was repeated in 1751 by Pope Benedict XIV. However, none of the Masonic Catholic monarchs were excommunicated from the Church. The Pope did not want any of them to follow England’s example by forming its own state church.
Webster then tells us on page 149 that in 1743, “French Freemasonry degenerated the most rapidly. The Order was soon invaded by intriguers.” The publication of Anderson’s Constitutions twenty years earlier had stated that Freemasonry was to be non-political. But a secret society such as this was too tempting for political men to ignore its potential as a tool to gain personal power. Among these were Frederick the Great of Prussia, who was initiated into Freemasonry in 1738.
It is only natural, then, that the Jesuit Order would look upon Masonry as a growing Protestant-Jewish power that could ultimately rival that of the Papacy. The Jesuits found their opportunity through Weishaupt’s Illuminati to infiltrate and move up the ranks of Masonry, taking control of the leadership of many lodges. One of Weishaupt’s letters shows his contempt for Protestants who were so easily fooled by Illuminism. It is quoted in Webster’s Secret Societies on pages 218 and 219,
“You cannot imagine what consideration and sensation our Priest’s degree is arousing. The most wonderful thing is that great Protestant and reformed theologians who belong to [Illuminism] still believe that the religious teaching imparted in it contains the true and genuine spirit of the Christian religion. Oh! men, of what cannot you be persuaded? I never thought that I should become the founder of a new religion.”
In other letters, Weishaupt laughs at Arminius, who had become one of his followers. Arminius was the champion of “free will.” Weishaupt called him “an unbearable, obstinate, arrogant, vain fool” (Webster, p. 225). The reason Weishaupt was able to fool Protestant leaders is because he couched Illuminism in the language of the Scriptures and appeared to give honor to Jesus.
Because Jesus often spoke in parables, Weishaupt and others took this to mean that Jesus had organized a secret society with secret doctrines – and that His disciples were revolutionaries trying to overthrow the Roman Empire. They interpret Jesus according to their own character and carnal motives, which is the opposite of the truth.
The parables Jesus taught can easily be interpreted if anyone simply knows the Old Testament, for they are extensions of the Old Testament story. There is no deception, no need to switch meanings. The only reason Jesus did not explain the parables to the general public was because the people would have believed what He said (Matt. 13:15) – and then they would not have crucified Him at the appointed time. Jesus knew that the Scriptures prophesied of His death in His first coming, and so He did not campaign to become Judah’s King.
The American Revolution (1776-1800)
Illuminism had great influence upon America’s founders through the Masonic lodges where many of them were members. Thus, when they spoke of “God,” their meaning has been debated. Some of them, like Samuel Adams and his cousin, John, meant it in the Protestant sense. Others, like Franklin and Jefferson, meant it more in a Masonic sense. This did not mean that they were atheists or even Deists in the modern sense. But it is safe to say that they were influenced by Masonic thinking.
Weishaupt himself had little direct influence on America’s founders. However, Weishaupt’s boss, the Jesuit Superior General Lorenzo Ricci had great influence.
Catholic influence in America (other than the early Spanish conquerors) began with the establishment of Maryland in 1634. A few years earlier, in 1625 the British Secretary of State under King Charles Stuart, converted to Catholicism. His name was George Calvert. Because it was not appropriate for him to remain in high position under a Calvinist monarch, he resigned his post.
King Charles soon needed money, so he carved territory out of northern Virginia and granted it to Calvert. His title was Lord Baltimore. He died soon afterward, so the charter was given to his son, Cecilius Calvert.
The first two ships set sail on Nov. 22, 1633 to establish the first Catholic settlement in Maryland, supposedly named after Queen Mary, but actually in honor of Mary Magdalene. Cecilius’ brother, Leonard Calvert, was its first governor. The two ships, the Ark and the Dove, were spiritually directed by Andrew White, a Jesuit priest. Andrew White became known as “the Apostle to Maryland.” Many years later, the President’s residence was called the “White” House, secretly in his honor.
The American Revolution cannot be understood apart from its European context – the Jesuit Order’s suppression on July 21, 1773. A month later, on August 17, Jesuit Superior General Lorenzo Ricci met with John Mattingly of Maryland and Cardinal Giovanni Braschi, the Apostolic Treasurer for the Pope. Braschi had been educated by the Jesuits and was General Ricci’s close friend. The next year, Braschi was elected Pope Pius VI.
When Pope Clement XIV died in 1774, Cardinal Braschi – as Apostolic Treasurer – was the acting Pope until a permanent Pope could be elected. Thus, he had in his hands control of the entire wealth and power of the Vatican as soon as his predecessor died on Sept. 22, 1774.
All of this simply meant that Jesuit Superior General Lorenzo Ricci had a close ally and friend in the Vatican, not only in the ailing Pope but also in his successor. Yet Ricci was put under arrest on Aug. 17, 1773 and moved to the Castel Sant’Angelo. This prison had a tunnel connecting it to the Vatican, so Ricci continued to enjoy direct access to his good friend, the Pope, during his “imprisonment.”
Ricci remained “imprisoned” until Nov. 24, 1775, when his death was announced. No successor was appointed, of course. But neither is there particular reason to suppose that Ricci had really died. F. Tupper Saussy’s book, Rulers of Evil, makes a rather strong case that Ricci was sent to America, where he was known anonymously as “The Professor.” Descriptions of him match Lorenzo Ricci.
This is mentioned in Chapter 16, “Tweaking the Religious Right,” on page 153 in Rulers of Evil
This mysterious person, unnamed in history books, had a profound effect upon America’s Founding Fathers. It was he who suggested using the British East India flag as the first American flag. George Washington first hoisted this flag on Jan. 2, 1776, months before the Declaration of Independence was written. When the British officers saw the flag, they cheered and saluted, thinking that it meant surrender. Instead, it meant that the American Revolution was to be fought under the flag of a Jesuit-owned company. Saussy writes on p. 168,
“And now, in 1773, the East India Company was governed by Freemasons, whose Grand Mason since 1772 was the ninth Lord Petre (his mastery would continue until 1777). Related to the Stourtons, Norfolks, and Arundells, the Petre family (pronounced “Peter”) was highly esteemed by the Society of Jesus. It was the Petres who, back in the sixteenth century, bankrolled the original Jesuit missions to England.
“The East India Company’s most powerful political attaché was William Petty, Lord Shelburne. We recall Shelburne as ‘The Jesuit of Berkeley Square’ who worked in 1763 with Lord Bute to conclude the French and Indian Wars with the Treaty of Paris….”
It is amazing that America’s Revolutionary War was fought under the flag of the East India Company owned by Jesuit Freemasons. But this is not so strange when we consider the fact that Britain was Protestant, and therefore an enemy of the Jesuits. The Jesuits wanted to weaken Britain by depriving her of her American colonies.
Secondly, America received help from Catholic France, who also wanted to weaken Britain, since the two nations seemed to be in a perpetual economic war. It is not very likely that the Catholic Church would have supported an American revolution without attempting at the same time to Catholicize the new nation. It was impossible to make each person convert to Catholicism, of course, but it was quite possible to gain control of its legal system.
The Federal City: Washington D.C.
The highest point in Washington D.C. was called Jenkins Point. In the 1790s, it was owned by Daniel Carroll – brother of Catholic Bishop John Carroll. David Ovason tells us, “that in earlier times the hill had been called Rome” (The Secret Architecture of Our National Capital, p. 8). He continues (pp. 8-9),
“Indeed, the story might easily be taken for the stuff of myth were it not supported by a long manuscript in the Maryland State Archives, at Annapolis. The deed, dated June 5, 1663, is in the name of Francis Pope, and sets out the basis for a survey of a strip of land called Rome, bounded by the inlet called Tiber.”
Symbolism is very important to secret societies, even to the Jesuits. This is why Pope’s land (called “Rome”) was used to build our nation’s capital, Washington D.C. It was to assert the Roman Catholic Church’s claim upon America, which they still maintain on the grounds that Columbus claimed this new land for the Church. (By the way, Columbus never even saw the mainland in America. He discovered some islands in the Caribbean Sea.)
The layout for Washington D.C. was entrusted to a French Masonic engineer named Pierre Charles L’Enfant. He got the job at the suggestion of Roman Catholic bishop John Carroll. Saussy points out that L’Enfant laid out the main city streets in the shape of an upside down five-pointed star of Baphomet, the symbol of the goat. The White House was constructed at the goat’s mouth. The two ears on the sides were marked by Mt. Vernon Place and Washington Circle. The horns were marked by Logan Circle and Dupont Circle.
In surveying and laying out the new city, L’Enfant numbered the city blocks. The 600 series runs from Q Street North through the Capitol grounds down to the mouth of James Creek. On page 228, Saussy tells us,
“All the numbers between 600 and 900 are assigned to blocks within this swath – except for the number 666. That number is missing from the map. It must have been secretly affixed to the only unnumbered section of blocks in the 600 series. That section, we find, includes the Capitol grounds that once were called ‘Rome’.”
Saussy’s viewpoint is perhaps a bit darker than the architects intended for it to be. This Baphomet symbol was certainly used in satanic groups, but the meaning of the pentagram depends upon who interprets it. If we interpret it according to the Masonic-Catholic intent, it should be seen more in astrological terms than satanic. The five-pointed star was a symbol of the constellation Virgo. The designer’s intent was clearly to portray the federal city as the beautiful Virgin, Virgo. [Saussy, though, writes: “In gnostic symbology, the pentagram is identified with Jupiter’s wife, Venus. There is a natural reason for this. A dedicated observer, from a fixed location over an eight-year period, will discern that the planet Venus travels a unique celestial pathway that exactly describes a pentagram…. Only Venus possesses the five-pointed star sign. Not one of the innumerable stars above us can recreate this by its own orbit.”]
George Washington’s proclamation of March 30, 1791 ordered that the new city’s sections should begin with a stone marker at Jones Point. This marker became the foundation stone for Washington D.C. It was laid in the ground at 3:30 p.m. on April 15, 1791. This was officially the beginning of the building of Washington D.C. The Freemasons chose that precise day and time, because, as David Ovason tells us on page 49,
“At exactly 3:30 p.m., Jupiter, the most beneficial planet in the skies, began to rise over the horizon. It was in 23 degrees of Virgo….
Jupiter, called the King’s Planet, was considered to be the planet for a number of ancient capital cities, including Jerusalem and Rome. It signified rulership, because it was named after the Roman god, Jupiter. Ovason continues,
“By this means, the zodiacal power of Virgo, which was called in later Masonic circles ‘the Beautiful Virgin,’ was able to stamp her benign influence on the building of the federal city. Was this one of the contributing reasons why many astrologers have insisted that Washington D.C. is ruled by zodiacal Virgo?
“It is quite clear that the ceremonial placing of the stone related to more than merely the founding of the federal district; it was somehow linked to the future destiny of America itself.”
Ovason concludes on pages 65 and 66 by saying,
“The chances of the correspondence being mere coincidence are so remote that we must assume that whoever was directing the planning of Washington D.C., not only had a considerable knowledge of astrology, but had a vested interest in emphasizing the role of the sign Virgo.
“Time and time again, as we study the Masonic involvement in the building of this city, through almost two centuries, we shall see emphasis placed on this sign Virgo.”
Thus, Washington D.C. was represented as Virgo, the Virgin, dominated by Jupiter (Rome). From that point on, virtually all of the buildings in the nation’s capital, as well as the art buildings and statues, were dedicated or established on days when Virgo was prominent. To the Freemasons, Virgo represented the Egyptian goddess, Isis. To the average Catholic, Virgo represented the Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus. To the elements within the Roman Catholic Church, Virgo was Mary Magdalene, the supposed mother of Jesus Junior – said to be the progenitor of the Merovingian line of French kings. This is the subject of the recent book, The Da Vinci Code, as well as the 2001 movie, Revelations. And, of course, it appears in the recent movie series, The Matrix.
Most Roman Catholics do not realize that many powerful occult forces in the Roman Church have labored to put Mary Magdalene above Mary, the mother of Jesus. It was not always this way, but powerful forces in the Church silently made the change over the years. All of the Notre Dame churches in the world are dedicated to Mary Magdalene, not to Mary, mother of Jesus.
In the original L’Enfant design for Washington D.C., he specified that the President’s house, the Capitol building, and the Washington Monument should be constructed to form a right triangle – in the shape of a Masonic square. All of these buildings were dedicated on days featuring Virgo. Ovason says on pp. 255-6,
“The White House cornerstone was laid at noon on October 13, 1792. The Moon and the Dragon’s Head were in Virgo.
“The Capitol cornerstone was laid by George Washington on September 18, 1793. At that time, the Sun, Mercury, and the Dragon’s Head were in Virgo.
“The Washington Monument foundation stone was laid at noon on July 4, 1848. The Moon and the Dragon’s Head were in Virgo.”
The “Dragon’s Head” is not the head of Draco. It is the point…
“… where the Moon intersects the path of the Sun. The term relates to an early phase of astrology when it was believed that the circuit of the Earth’s satellite [Moon] was the invisible body of a stellar dragon.
“In terms of the triangulation of the plan for Washington D.C., this means that the corners of the L’Enfant triangle were symbolically fixed into the Earth when this beneficial point – the solar-lunar meeting point – was in Virgo.
“This same triangulation is reflected in the stars gathered within and around the constellation Virgo.”
L’Enfant carefully planned for the federal city to manifest the star pattern formed by three stars (all of the first magnitude) surrounding Virgo. They are: Arcturus, Spica, and Regulus. These form almost a perfect right-angled triangle, with Virgo inside the triangle.
The White House represents Arcturus, the guardian star, supposed to confer renown and prosperity.
The Capitol represents Regulus, the “Little King.” It shows that Congress is King, ruling from the Capitol, the place of power and command.
The Washington Monument represents Spica. On star maps, Spica is in the wheat ear held by Virgo, and so it represents future growth, nourishment, wealth, renown, and advancement.
In this way, the so-called “federal triangle” was meant to bring to earth the heavenly triangle of stars surrounding Virgo. In fact, L’Enfant originally designed this to be a perfect right-angled triangle, but the Washington Monument was ultimately constructed to one side, because, they said, the foundations were not secure enough to place it in the location drawn up by L’Enfant. Thus, the federal triangle was no longer a perfect Masonic square (right angle).
However, in moving the Monument to one side, it became a near-perfect representation of the actual location of the three stars mentioned above. These stars nearly form a right triangle, but not quite. Spica is two degrees too far south to make it a perfect right triangle. In constructing the Monument slightly off center, they made the federal triangle reflect the precise positions of the three stars!
The Mall between the Washington Monument and the Capitol was meant to portray the ecliptic – that is, the path of the Sun through the Zodiac (that is, the constellations). Constitution Avenue, which runs parallel to the Mall, has zodiacs on either side of it. The Dirkson Building on the east end of the Capitol grounds contains 12 zodiacs. On the other end of Constitution Avenue there are 3 more zodiacs. The idea was to portray the ecliptic path as America’s path – that we would follow the Constitution (avenue), rather than the laws of hereditary kings.
Washington, the capital of the Romish-Masonic cult of the ‘virgin’:
Source: Conspiracy Planet
‘Rulers of Evil’ – Divide & Conquer: The Jesuit Way
by URI DOWBENKO
Rulers of Evil: Useful Knowledge about Governing Bodies
by F. Tupper Saussy
American history is intimately entangled with occult politics.
The secret science of Masonic, Roman and Babylonian symbology figures prominently. The semiotics of cabalistic signs as well as Sumerian iconography also points to a subliminal influence which has been virtually ignored by mainstream historians.
Tupper Saussy’s Rulers of Evil is a well-honed and highly readable account of the hidden history of America.
In great detail, the author circumscribes the influence of the Roman Catholic Church and its Jesuit cadres in promoting the governance of the Church Militant and the US Federal Government – both of which he equates with the proscribed rulership by those bearing the Mark of Cain.
Well-versed in the nuances of Jesuitic and specious reasoning, Tupper Saussy maintains that American history has been dominated by the sub rosa machinations of the Jesuits.
Furthermore, he contends that their behind-the-scenes manipulations have resulted in the government we deserve.
For instance, Saussy points out that the result of the Dred Scott decision, which was supposed to abolish slavery, actually did the opposite.
“First, slavery was abolished by the Thirteenth Amendment (1865),” Saussy writes. “Then, the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) created a new national citizenship. Unlike State citizenship, which was denied to Negroes, national citizenship was available to anyone as long as they subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of the United States – that is to the Federal Government, whose seat is the District of Columbia, ‘Rome.'”
“What is so remarkably Jesuitic about the scheme that proceeded out of Roger Taney’s opinion [Taney was the U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice who wrote it] is that slavery was sustained by the very amendment that supposedly abolished it. Amendment Thirteen provides for the abolition of ‘involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.'”
Saussy contends that, “In our time the federally regulated communications media, with their continually exciting celebration of violence and drug-use, have subtly but vigorously induced youthful audiences to play on the minefield of complementary criminal statutes. The fruit of this collaboration is a burgeoning national prison population of men and women enslaved constitutionally. American slavery has become a permanent institution.”
In describing the origins of the Society of Jesus founded by Ignatius Loyola, Saussy delves into the organization’s militaristic nature, its extreme oath of obedience (which he reproduces in the book from a Library of Congress document), and the cabalistic significance of their rituals and methodology.
Jesuit casuistry, writes Saussy, is known as “the process of applying moral principles falsely in deciding the rights or wrongs of a case – the word ‘casuistry’ comes from ‘cases.’ WWWebster [the online dictionary] equates casuistry with rationalization, ‘to cause something to seem reasonable; to provide plausible but untrue reasons for conduct.’ (In early 1999, President Clinton’s biographer, David Maraniss, could be seen remarking on talkshows that the President owed his formidable skills as a criminal defendant to ‘his training in casuistry at Georgetown University.’)”
Georgetown, of course, is the preeminent Jesuit school, still administered by the Society of Jesus, and the foremost educator of U.S. “policymakers,” “lawmakers,” and federal bureaucrats.
“The great Jesuit casuist Antonio Escobar pardoned evildoers as long as it was committed in pursuit of a lofty goal,” continues Saussy. “‘Purity of intention,’ he declared in 1627, ‘may justify actions which are contrary to moral code and to human laws.'”
Thus, Jesuit “logic” remains the foundation for rationalizing morally repugnant and ethically questionable behavior in today’s society.
“Hermann Busenbaum ratified Escobar with his own famous maxim, ‘Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita,’ ‘If the end is legal, the means are legal.’ Escobar and Busenbaum boil down to the essential doctrine of terrorism: ‘The end justifies the means.'”
State terrorism, of course, is not excluded from this dictum.
During the American Revolution, the Superior General of Jesuitism (also called the Black Pope) was Lorenzo Ricci – pronounced “Richey”. Saussey credits him with translating the most celebrated treatise on war ever published, Joseph Marie Amiot’s Sun-tzu, usually called The Art of War.
The French edition of Sun Tzu’s Thirteen Articles Concerning Military Art was published by Amiot in 1772. Since Amiot was a Jesuit priest under obedience to Superior General Ricci, Saussy maintains that Ricci is “the author of Amiot’s Sun-tzu based on a remark by Malachi Martin that a book written by a Jesuit due to the obedience factor can be presumed ‘in essence to be the work of his Superior General.'”
Saussy also maintains that Lorenzo Ricci was responsible for setting the stage for the American Revolution by using the draconian Stamp Act to manipulate the colonists into fomenting the American Revolution as well as the establishment of the Republic.
His speculation goes far afield, however, in ascribing a sinister motivation to the founding of America itself. For instance, his conjecture that Ricci came to the United States to instigate the signing of the Declaration of Independence has no basis in fact; Tupper admits as much. It might have been the Wonderman of Europe [Count of St. Germain], for all we know – who also was purported to have “died” a “philosophical” death in Europe, then come to America to finish his “work.”
In addition, Saussy’s exclusive emphasis on these negative aspects is an ipso facto denial of an intrinsically American optimism and idealism, which has survived despite any machinations of the Jesuits.
In fact, the author’s exclusive reliance on canonical scripture and his neglect of the origins of spiritual warfare are the primary stumbling blocks in his final analysis – though his grasp of historical facts must be commended.
For instance, he points out that the first American flag hoisted by George Washington himself on January 2, 1776 was the flag of the notorious East India Company, the prime opium trafficking agency of the British Crown.
Consisting of thirteen alternating red and white stripes with the double cross or Union Jack in the upper left, this flag has an occult significance which has been rarely described. Saussy also does an impressive cabalistic interpretation of the U.S. Great Seal.
Saussy leaves readers with much to ponder. His conclusions may or may not be correct due to his literalist interpretation of scripture, but Rulers of Evil remains an important historical work for the understanding of current events.
Without knowing the history of Roman religion and Babylonian priestcraft with its pantheon of gods and goddesses, as well as the
subsequent Catholic religion with its idolatry of Jesus, it’s impossible to gauge the significance of contemporary government, secular authority and the spiritual warfare of modern life.
Rulers of Evil is a rare book about understanding American history in context. Its ability to decipher the meaning of occult power struggles and translate them into living guidelines is impressive.
Finally, the author’s description of the worldview of “Condemnation” vs. “Reconciliation” is an enlightened analysis of the significance of temporal power and spiritual wisdom.
Tupper Saussy’s insights are worth reading again and again.
Source: Continuing Counter-Reformation
Sun. Oct 21, 2001
Finding the lost
by F. Tupper Saussy
THE ONE SURE FACT OF AMERICAN HISTORY is that the United States was conceived in secrecy. Our history’s most trustworthy witness, Charles Thomson, a classical scholar who kept detailed minutes of the clandestine proceedings of the Continental Congress from 1774 to 1789, destroyed all of his personal papers relative to these defining events.
Thomson, a protégé of Benjamin Franklin, enjoyed a unique reputation for truth-telling. Hired by colonists to keep minutes of critical pow-wows with Native Americans, he was honored by the Delaware tribesmen with the name The Man Who Talks the Truth. Later on, during the Revolution, when he would bring his daily reports of congressional proceedings to the streets of Philadelphia, eager mobs would cry “Here comes Charles Thomson! Here comes the Truth!”
After the ceasing of hostilities, leading citizens besieged Thomson to write his account of the new republic’s conception and birth. The definitive insider declined, saying in the presence of Dr. Benjamin Rush,
I ought not, for I should contradict all the histories of the great events of the Revolution. Let the world admire the supposed wisdom and valor of our great men. Perhaps they may adopt the qualities that have been ascribed to them, and thus good may be done. I shall not undeceive future generations.
On another occasion, Thomson commented to friends that “If the truth were known, many careers would be tarnished and the leadership of the nation would be weakened.”
What did Charles Thomson know that textbook histories do not tell us? What did Thomson know that even well-educated Americans are deceived by not knowing?
I was thrust into digging for the answers by situations few if any textbook historians have ever experienced. In 1984, the government that Charles Thomson helped bring to life attacked me with personnel and strategies foreign to the American sense of fairness.
As the attack wore on year after year, I began to wonder. Could the same quality of personnel and strategies arrayed against me have founded the United States? Could this be why Charles Thomson was so bitterly (or perhaps fearfully) reluctant to tell the truth?
My investigation began with a general overview of the federal district, Washington, D.C. No studious observer looking for meaning can help but discern in Washington an architectural and monumental presence that is almost overwhelmingly Roman.
I further discovered that “Rome” was transferred to the federal government in the years following ratification of the Constitution by its owner, Daniel Carroll. Carroll was the chairman of a three-man commission appointed by President George Washington to find a suitable location for the capital city. A signer of the Declaration of Independence, Daniel Carroll was a Roman Catholic educated by Jesuits in Maryland and France. His brother John was a Jesuit priest.
John Carroll became the first Catholic bishop in America, presiding over the See of Baltimore, which included Washington, D.C. John also founded Georgetown University, which has long been regarded as the incubator of federal policy, domestic and international. Strikingly secular in curriculum and student body, Georgetown is still owned and operated by Jesuit priests. Its seal proclaims the union of the Roman Church with the secular State, depicting the Roman eagle with the global world in one talon and a cross in the other, surmounted by the motto Utraque unum, “Both together.”
Now, what made these discoveries particularly relevant to my life was that the assistant United States attorney who represented the IRS in its prosecution of me (for the violation of some law that is yet to be found anywhere in the revenue statutes) was himself a Jesuit priest.
The Jesuits are members of the Society of Jesus, which I discovered was founded in 1540 for a singular purpose: to neutralize the effects Protestantism was having on the rights, interests, and authority of the Roman Papacy. Their mission was, and remains, to infiltrate non-Catholic cultures and, by whatever means may be necessary, subjugate the people to Roman Catholicism. The term used by the Church to describe this process is “missionary adaptation.” What if the Society’s mission in America was to incite a Protestant population to separate itself from its Protestant monarch and unwittingly make of itself the Catholic nation America has in fact become?
Finding myself caught in such a unique tangle of facts and circumstances gave me to believe, not too unrealistically I hope you will agree, that perhaps the task of investigating Roman Catholic involvement in the American secular establishment had been assigned to me by whom religious people call God.
Rather than pass through the gates of the prison camp in Atlanta, where the court had sentenced me to serve a year for violating the law that does not exist, I embarked on a journey that would last ten years. A homeless fugitive separated from wife, children, friends, and native identity, yet protected at every turn by invisible powers that will be discussed in a forthcoming book, I pursued my pursuers in the District of Columbia, Georgetown University, and in libraries all across America.
I discovered hidden American founding fathers every bit as important as Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, and Sherman – men like Lorenzo Ricci, Nikolaus von Hontheim, Joseph-Marie Amiot, Francis Thorpe, Daniel Coxe, the 3rd Earl of Bute, and Robert Bellarmine.
To comprehend my discoveries, I had to become knowledgeable in both Roman Catholicism and its foe, Protestantism.
Because Protestantism fought Rome with the Bible, I had to learn what the Papacy disliked about the Bible. This ordered a certain immersion in biblical scholarship.
I was further obliged to delve into yet another dimension of the secular struggle between Catholics and Protestants: Freemasonry. The Papacy threatened excommunication to Catholics who as much as spoke well of Freemasons; Freemasons wanted to purge the world of Catholicism. I discovered an important link between the two rival camps, a “secret bridge” controlled by the Papacy.
Finally, since Roman Catholicism requires its members to advance the Church through secular governmental offices, my investigation required me to amplify an already extensive study of constitutional law, which had begun in the late seventies with the preparation of The Miracle On Main Street.
RULERS OF EVIL is the product of this interdisciplinary labor. Often during the preparation of manuscripts I would catch myself wondering if American education could any longer turn out historians able to converse in so many disparate areas. I fervently hoped so, because our life, liberty, and property are built on these subjects. How dangerous to be ignorant of the least of them!
The Society of Jesus developed the educational system that produced the Enlightenment, which was the incubator of the secular humanism that drives organized learning in modern America. For all the good that Jesuit educational norms may have done, their bottom line, sad to say, is a national dumbing-down.
You can see this reflected in a survey by the National Association of Scholars (NAS) of U.S. News & World Report’s annual listing of “America’s Best Colleges” private and public. NAS found that in 1914, 90% of the elite colleges required the study of history. In 1939 and 1964 that figure had shrunk to 50%. By 1996, only one of the 50 best schools offered a required history course. As I wrote in ROE,
The day is approaching, perhaps, when the only historians will be amateurs who study history as self-help, who examine the past in order to make sense of the present and not be caught unprepared by the future.
I was writing about myself there. Somebody’s got to keep the truth in circulation. If not us, who?