The Anti-Christian Conjuration (2)
CHAPTER VTHE REVOLUTION INSTITUTES NATURALISM
Protestantism had failed; France, after the wars of religion, remained Catholic. But bad leaven had been deposited within it. Its fermentation produced, in addition to the corruption of morals, three intellectual toxins: Gallicanism, Jansenism and philosophism. Their action on the social organism brought about the Revolution, a second and much more terrible assault on Christian civilization. As the conclusion of this book will demonstrate, the entire movement imprinted on Christianity by the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Revolution is a satanic effort to tear man away from the supernatural order originally established by God and restored by Our Lord Jesus Christ in the middle of time, and confine him to naturalism. As everything was Christian in the French constitution, everything had to be destroyed. The Revolution worked conscientiously. In a few months, it wiped out the government of France, its laws and its institutions. She wanted to shape a new people - this is the expression that we find, on every page, under the pen of the rapporteurs of the Convention; much better to “remake man” himself. Also, the Conventionalists, in accordance with the new conception that the Renaissance had given of human destinies, did not limit their ambition to France; they wanted to inoculate revolutionary madness to neighboring peoples, to the entire universe. Their ambition was to overthrow the social structure and rebuild it anew. “The Revolution,” Thuriot said to the Legislative Assembly in 1792, “is not only for France; we are accountable to humanity for it. Siéyès had said before him, in 1788: “Let us suddenly rise to the ambition of wanting ourselves to serve as an example to the nations (1). . And Barrère, at the time when the States-General were meeting at Versailles: “You are, he said, called to start history again. We see the path taken by the idea of the Renaissance; how much during the Revolution it showed itself more complete in its development and more daring in its enterprise than it had! appeared two centuries earlier in the Reformation. In its April 1816 issue, The Masonic Mnudr said “When what has long been considered an ideal is realized, the broader horizons of a new ideal offer to human activity, always moving towards a better future, new fields of exploration, new conquests to make, new hopes to pursue. » This is true in the way of good. As says
1. What is the Third Estate?
the Psalmist, I have just arranged in his heart the steps to rise to the perfection he aspires to (1). This is also true in the path of evil. The men of the Renaissance did not carry their views, at least not all of them, as far as those of the Reformation. The men of the Reformation were overtaken by those of the Revolution. The Renaissance had moved the place of happiness and changed its conditions; she had declared that she saw him in this world. -Religious authority remained to say: “You are wrong; happiness is in Heaven. » The Reformation pushed aside authority; but she kept the book of Divine Revelations, which continued to use the same language. Philosophism denied that God had ever spoken to men, and the Revolution strove to drown its witnesses in blood, in order to be able to freely establish the cult of nature Le Journal des Débats, ep one of its April issues 1852, recognized this connection “We are revolutionaries; but we are the sons of the Renaissance and of philosophy before being sons of the Revolution. * There is no need to dwell at length on the work undertaken by the Revolution. Pope Pius IX characterized it with one word, in the Encyclical of December 8, 1849: The Revolution is inspired by Satan himself; its goal is to destroy from top to bottom the edifice of Christianity and to rebuild on its ruins the social order of paganism. It first destroyed the ecclesiastical order. “For twelve hundred years and more, according to the energetic expression of Taine, the clergy had worked at the cons-
1. Ps. LXXXIII. 6-7.
traction of the company as architect and as laborer, first alone, then almost alone”; they made it impossible for him to continue his work, they wanted to make it impossible for him to ever resume it. Then royalty was suppressed, the living and perpetual link of national unity, the vigilante of all who wanted to undermine it. We got rid of the nobility, guardians of traditions, and the workers' corporations, also conservatives of the past. Then, all these sentries aside, we set to work, much to destroy, which was easy, little to rebuild, which was less so. We do not have to paint a picture of these ruins and constructions here. Let us only say that, as far as the political structure is concerned, the Revolution hastened to proclaim the Republic, which the Renaissance had dreamed of for Rome itself, which the Protestants had already wanted to replace the monarchy in France, and which today hui does the works of Freemasonry so well. Disciples of J.-J. Rousseau, the Conventionalists of 1792 gave as the basis of the new building this principle, that man is good by nature; thereupon, they raised the Masonic trilogy: liberty, equality, fraternity. Freedom for all and for everything, since there are only good instincts in man; equality, because, equally good, men have equal rights in everything; fraternity, or breaking down all barriers between individuals, families, nations, to let humankind embrace each other in a universal Republic. In terms of religion, the cult of nature was organized. The humanists of the Renaissance had called for it. The Protestants had not dared to push the Reformation that far. Our revolutionaries tried it. They did not come to this excess at first. They began by calling the Catholic clergy to their festivals. Talleyrand pontificated on July 14, 1790, at the great Feast of the Federation, surrounded by 40 chaplains of the national guard, wearing tricolor scarves on their alps, orchestrated by 1,800 musicians, in the presence of 25,000 deputies and 400,000 spectators. But soon he no longer wanted even these exhibitions, which were more “patriotic” than religious: “It is not appropriate,” he said, “for religion to appear at public festivals, it is more religious to exclude it. » With the national cult aside, it was necessary to look for another. Mirabeau proposed a very abstract one: “The object of our national holidays,” he said, “must only be the cult of liberty and the cult of the law. » It seemed thin. Boissy-d'Anglas loudly regretted the time when "political and religious institutions" lent each other mutual aid, when "a brilliant religion" presented itself with dogmas which promised "pleasure and happiness", adorned with all the ceremonies which strike the senses, the most cheerful fictions, the sweetest illusions His wishes were not long in being granted. A new religion was founded, having its dogmas, its priests, its Sunday, its saints. God was replaced by the Supreme Being and the goddess Reason, the Catholic cult by the cult of Nature (1).
1. On the feast of the Supreme Being, it was Nature which received the homage of Robespierre and the representatives of the Commitee
“The great goal pursued by the Revolution,” said Boissy-d’Anglas, “is is to bring man back to the purity, to the simplicity of nature. » Poets, orators, Conventionalists, never ceased to make invocations of “Nature” heard. And the dictator Robespierre marked the trends, the will of the innovators in these words: “All sects must merge by themselves in the universal religion of Nature (1). » This is currently what the Universal Israelite Alliance wants, what it is working towards, what it is mission to establish in the world, only with less haste and more know-how. Nothing could better respond to the aspirations of the humanists of the Renaissance. On the celebration of August 10, 1793, a statue of Nature was erected on the Place de la Bastille, and the president of the Convention, Hérault de Scales, addressed this tribute to her in the name of official France: “Sovereign of the savages and the enlightened nations, O Nature! this immense people, assembled at the first rays of day before your image, is worthy of you. It is free; it is in your bosom, it is in your sacred sources, that he recovered his rights, that he was regenerated. After having gone through so many centuries of errors and servitude, you had to return to the simplicity of your ways to find freedom and equality. Nature, receive the expression of the eternal attachment of the French for your laws!” The minutes add. “Following this kind of hymn, the only prayer since the first nations,
1. Speech of May 7, 1794.
First centuries of the human race, addressed to Nature by the representatives of a nation and by its legislators, the president filled a cup, of ancient form, with water which flowed from the bosom of Nature: he made libations around Nature, he drank from the cup and presented it to the envoys of the French people. » We see, the worship is complete: prayer, sacrifice, communion. With worship, institutions. “It is through institutions,” wrote the Minister of Police Duval, “that the opinion and morality of people are composed (1). » Among these institutions, the one considered most necessary to make the people forget their old religious habits and make them adopt new ones, was the Decadi or civil Sunday. Also, it is on this creation that the Republic spent the most decrees and efforts. Annual festivals were added to the Décadi: political festivals, civil festivals, moral festivals. The aim of the political festivals, according to Chénier, was to “consecrate the immortal epochs when the various tyrannies collapsed under the national breath, and the great steps of reason which crossed Europe and struck the limits of the world (2) . » The republican holiday par excellence was on January 21, because it celebrated "the anniversary of the just punishment of the last king of the French". There was also the celebration of the founding of the Republic, set for 1st Vendémiaire. The great national holiday, resurrected today, was that of the federation or the oath, set for July 14.
1. Moniteur des 9, 10 and 11 pluviôse, year VII 2. Speech of November 5, 1794
For morality, there was the celebration of youth, those of marriage, of motherhood, of old people and especially those of human rights were, if not instituted and celebrated, at least decreed or proposed, a republican calendar was invented entirely on agriculture. new cult, the cult of Nature was the fatal outcome of the ideas the Renaissance had sown in the minds of the Reformation, a timid, imperfect realization; it had contented itself with bastardizing Christianity; annihilated it as much as it was in it, and on its ruins raised altars to Reason and Voluptuousness. We know where naturalism led, which, in the thinking of its promoters, was to exalt the dignity of man. Barbé-Marbois, in his report to the Council of Elders, denounced school youth as “exceeding all limits in their excesses, even those that nature itself seems to have assigned to childhood disorders. "And at the other end of life, all the documents of the time show us the deceased delivered to "impure gravediggers", families getting used to "considering the remains of a husband, of a father, of a child, of a brother, of a sister, of a friend, like those of any other animal that we get rid of. » In 1800, citizen Cambry, charged by the central administration of the Seine with making a report on the state of the graves in Paris, thought he could only publish it in Latin, so much shame was there in these barbaric funerals. Often the bodies were fed to dogs. All those who had retained some honesty were appalled by the disorder of morals which had thus reached its height. With the ruin of morals and the abolition of Christian worship came bankruptcy and poverty. Such was the outcome of modern civilization in its first attempt. The one to which we are currently delivered will not have a better end. Ruin, poverty, moral disorder could not always last and get worse. The public cry demanded the reestablishment of Catholic worship. It had never ceased to be practiced with disregard for life. Priests remained among the populations, who exposed themselves to all dangers to promote the clandestine exercise of the holy ministry. In 1800, the work of restoration was essential, all creations intended to replace Christianity had fallen into absolute and universal discredit. The General Councils were unanimous in recognizing and declaring it (1). Napoleon came. If he reestablished, in concert with Pius VII, the Church of Franco, he took his measures - through the organic articles, the institution of the University, the Civil Code, etc. - so that Christian civilization would not could regain its entire empire over souls and that it would not be restored in institutions. It did, as has been well said, only stem the Revolution. The Revolution was therefore able to resume its course with
1. Analysis of the minutes of the General Councils of the departments for Year VIII and Year IX. Bibl. national.
a sort of regularity which she wants to maintain until the moment has come for a complete and this time definitive overthrow, she believes, of Christian civilization and of all that has been built on the Christ, to establish on the ruins of the supernatural order, the reign of naturalism, the deification of man.
CHAPTER VI
THE REVOLUTION, ONE OF THE EPOCHES OF THE WORLD
At the beginning of the 19th century, one could believe that the French Revolution had been mainly a political revolution and that once this revolution was accomplished, society would get back on its feet. We can no longer have this illusion today, even if we only consider the Revolution in its first period. As Mr. Brunetière said: “The grandeur of the events overflows and exceeds in every sense the mediocrity of those who believe themselves or the authors of them. The disproportion is prodigious between the work and the workers. A current stronger than them pulls them along, carries them away, rolls them, breaks them... and continues to flow. : When the Duke of Rochefoueault-Liancourt woke up Louis XVI to announce the storming of the Bastille, the king asked: “Is this a revolt then?” The duke replied. “No, sire, it’s a revolution.” He did not say enough, it was not a revolution, but the REVOLUTION that arose. What appears at first sight in the Revolution, what de Maistre saw there and pointed out from the day he began to consider it, and what we see at the present time with even more evidence , it is ANTI-CHRISTIANITY. The Revolution consists essentially of the revolt against Christ, and even the revolt against God, even more, the negation of God. Its supreme goal is to shield man and society from the supernatural. The word FREEDOM, in his mouth, has no other meaning: freedom for human nature to be its own, as Satan wanted to be its own and this, as we will explain later, at the instigation of Lucifer who wants to recover the supremacy that the superiority of his nature gave him over human nature, and which was ousted by the elevation of the Christian to the supernatural order. And this is why J. de Maistre very rightly characterized the Revolution with this word “satanic”. “Without doubt, the French Revolution spanned a period in which not all moments were alike; However, its general character did not vary, and in its very cradle it proved what it should be. » “There is a satanic character in the Revolution which distinguishes it from everything we have seen and perhaps from everything we will see. It is satanic in its essence (1). » Pius IX, in 1849, said – we have already recalled these words – with even more authority: “The Revolution is inspired by Satan himself; its goal is to destroy from top to bottom the edifice of Christianity, and to rebuild on its ruins the social order of paganism. » After our disasters of 1870-1871, M. de Saint-Bonnet said: “France has been working for a century to oust from all its institutions the one to whom it
1. Complete works of J. de Maistre, vol. I, pp. 51, 52, 55, 303, 353
owes Tolbiac, Poitiers, Bouvines and Denain, that is to say the One to whom it owes its territory, its existence! To mark all its hatred, to silence the insult of expelling it from the walls of our cities, the sect has, since 1830, excited an active press to watch for the time of the feast of this "Christ who loves the Franks", of Him who is made “Man to save man, who became Bread to feed him” And he concludes: “And France asks the cause of its misfortunes” To the hatred of Christ that we had! point believed possible within Christianity, joins the direct revolt against God (1). There are reasons to believe that this revolt against God could not have taken place even in the heat of the great fight between Lucifer and the. Archangel Saint Michael. It takes the limited spirit of man to rise up against the Infinite. It also takes corruption and extreme baseness of heart. What was not seen before is seen today. “The Revolution is the struggle between man and God; it wants to be the triumph of man over God. » This is what those who say that at present it is a question of knowing who will prevail, the Revolution or the Counter-Revolution, declare. Also, Mr. de Saint-Bonnet does not say anything too much, he 1. In one of his letters to d'Alembert, Voltaire assigns Damilaville the special character of "hating God" and working to make him hated. This is undoubtedly why he wrote to her more frequently and with more intimacy than to all his other followers. After the death of this unfortunate man, bankrupt and separated from his wife, Voltaire wrote this to the same man: I will regret Damilaville all my life. I loved the intrepidity of his heart. He had the enthusiasm of Saint Paul (that is to say as much zeal to destroy religion as Saint Paul to establish it): HE WAS A NECESSARY MAN.
1. Ibid., t. T, p. 406. 2. Complete works of *1 J. de Maistre, t. IX, pp. 250-252.
perhaps does not say enough, when he affirms that “the present time can only be compared to that of the revolt of the angels. » And consequently, from de Maistre, from Bonald, Donoso-Cortès, Blanc de Saint-Bonnet, others undoubtedly agree to say: “The world cannot remain in this state. Or it comes to an end, in the hatred of God and his Christ which the Antichrist will make more general and more violent; or he is on the eve of the greatest mercy that God has exercised in this world, apart from the Redemptive act. This is the state we are in, the one that the Revolution created, the one that has not ceased to be since the first days of the Revolution,under whose empire we are still. In 1790, two years after the fall of Robespierre, J. de Maistre wrote: “The revolution is not over, nothing suggests its end. It has already produced great misfortunes, it announces even greater ones (1). » On the eve of the day when it seemed to superficial minds that the coronation of Napoleon would make the new order of things stable, he wrote to M. de Rossi (November 3, 1804): “One would be tempted to believe that all is lost, but things will happen that no one expects... Everything points to a general convulsion in the political world (2). » At the climax of the Napoleonic epic: “The universe has never seen anything like it! And what else do we have to see? Ah! how far we are from the last act or the last scene of this terrible tragedy! » “Nothing announces the end of catastrophes, and everything announces on the contrary that they must last (3). " It was in 1806 that he formulated this prognosis. The following year, he invited Mr. de Rossi to make this observation with him: "How many times, since the origin of this terrible Revolution, have we had all the reasons for world to say: Acta est fabula? And yet the play continues... So true is it that wisdom consists in knowing how to look firmly at this era for what it is, that is to say ONE OF THE GREATEST EPOCHS OF THE UNIVERSE ; since the invasion of the barbarians and the renewal of society in Europe, nothing like it has happened in the world; it takes time for such operations, and I am also loath to believe that evil can have no end or that it could end tomorrow... The political world being absolutely disrupted, right down to its foundations, nor the generation current, nor probably the one which will succeed it, will be able to see the accomplishment of all that is being prepared... We have perhaps two centuries left... When I think of all that must still happen in Europe , and in the world, it seems to me that the Revolution is beginning (4) » Comes the Restoration of the Bourbons He had never stopped announcing, with imperturbable confidence, despite the advent of the Empire, the coronation. of Bonaparte and the constantly triumphant march of Napoleon across Europe, that the king would return His prophecy comes true; he sees the Bourbons again on the throne of their fathers and he says: “A certain person, I do not know what, announces that. NOTHING is finished. » << The miserable misfortune for the French would be to believe that the Revolution is over and that the column is replaced because it is raised. We must believe, on the contrary, that the revolutionary spirit is incomparably stronger and more dangerous than it was a few years ago. What can the king do when the lights of his people are extinguished? (5) » “Nothing is stable yet, and we see the seeds of misfortune on all sides (6). » “The present state of Europe (1819) is horrifying; that of France in particular is inconceivable. The Revolution is undoubtedly standing, and not only is it standing, but it is walking, it is running, it is fighting. The only difference I see between this era and that of the great Robespierre is that then heads fell and today they turn. It is infinitely probable that the French will give us yet another tragedy (7). » Isn't this new tragedy shaping up to be the next one? What gave J. de Maistre this certainty of views was that he knew how to raise his gaze above the revolutionary facts that he witnessed to their primary causes. “Since the time of the Reformation,” he said, “and even since that of Wyclef, there has existed in Europe a certain terrible and invariable spirit which has worked tirelessly to overthrow European monarchies and Christianity.. On this destructive spirit all the anti-social and anti-social systems were added.
1. Complete works of J. de Maistre, vol. II. From the pope. Int. 2. Ibid., t. XIII. pp. 133-188. 3. Ibid., t. XIV, p. 150.
4. Complete works of J. de Maistre, t. VIII, p. 312. 5. ibid., t XI. p. 232. 6. Ibid., L VIII, p. 273. 7. Complete works of J. de Maistre, vol. I, IL 26.
Christians who have appeared today: Calvinism, Jansenism, Philosophism, Illuminism, etc. (let's add: liberalism, internationalism, modernism); all of these are one and should be considered as one sect that has sworn the destruction of the. Christianity and that of all Christian thrones, but above all and above all that of the house of Bourbon and the See of Rome (1). » Not only did de Maistre see the Revolution having, in time, a base which extended over four centuries, but he saw it in space reaching all peoples. At the head of a Memoir addressed in 1809 to his sovereign, Victor-Emmanuel I, he said: “If there is something evident, it is the immense basis of the current Revolution which has no other limits than the world (2). » “Things are arranging for a general upheaval of the globe. » “It is an era, one of the greatest eras of the universe,” he said constantly, seeing in the Revolution such great preliminaries and such a large surface area. He added: “Woe to the generations who witness the times of the world (3)! » “The French Revolution is a great era, and its consequences in all genres will be felt well beyond the time of its explosion and the limits of its home (4). » “The more I examine what is happening , the more I am convinced that we are witnessing one of the greatest eras of humankind (1). » “The world is in a state of childbirth. » State of childbirth, this is what makes a time an epoch. There was the time of the flood, which gave birth to the new generation of men, the time of Moses who gave birth to the precursor people, the time of Christ who gave birth to the Christian people. The era of the Revolution is the era of the most acute antagonism between Christian civilization and pagan civilization, between naturalism and the supernatural, between Christ and Satan. What will be the outcome of the struggle? Lucifer and his people think they will triumph. The Jews say that the coming of their Messiah, that the reign of the Antichrist is near, and that this reign will open, for their benefit, the greatest era in the world. , after reading this book, will share our conviction which is completely opposite. The defeat of the Revolution will inaugurate the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ over humankind, forming only one flock under one Pastor.
1. Ibid.s t. IX, p. 358.
CHAPTER VII
WHAT THE REVOLUTION DOES AND SAYS IN THE DAY
About associations, Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau posed “in these terms the question which, at this time, keeps France in suspense and the world attentive to what is happening here. “In this country whose moral unity has, through the centuries, made it strong and great, two young people, separated even less by their social condition than by the education they receive, grow up without knowing each other, until the day they meet, they will be so dissimilar that they risk no longer understanding each other. Little by little, two different societies are being prepared - one more and more democratic, carried away by the broad current of the Revolution, and the other more and more imbued with doctrines which one could believe not to have survived the great movement of the 18th century — and destined one day to collide. The fact noted in these lines by Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau is real. There are, in fact, not only two youths, but two societies in our France. They do not wait for the future to collide, they have been grappling for a long time. This division of the country against itself goes back beyond the period assigned to it by Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau, beyond the 18th century. We can already see it in the 16th century, in the long efforts that Protestants made to constitute a nation within a nation. To find the moral unity which has, through the centuries, made the strength and greatness of our homeland, and which Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau regrets, we must go even further. It was the Renaissance that began to share ideas and morals, remaining Christian in some, returning to paganism in others. But after more than four centuries, the spirit of the Renaissance has still not been able to triumph over the spirit of Christianity and rebuild the moral unity of the country in the opposite direction. Nor the violence, the perfidies and the betrayals of the Reformation; nor the corruption of minds and hearts undertaken by Philosophism; nor the confiscations, the exiles, the massacres of the Revolution, could get the better of the doctrines and virtues with which Christianity imbibed the French soul for fourteen centuries. Napoleon saw him still standing on the ruins piled up by the Terror, and he found nothing better than to let him live, while denying him the means to fully restore Christian civilization. From then on, the conflict with various vicissitudes, maintained, as Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau remarks, not so much by the diversity of social classes as by the two educations present: university education founded by Napoleon, and education Christian which was maintained in families, in the church, and soon in free education. So, the Church is always there, continuing to say that true civilization is that which extends to the true condition of man, to the destinies that his Creator has made for him and to those that his Redeemer made it possible; therefore, that society should be so constituted and governed as to promote efforts toward holiness. And the Revolution is still there too, saying that man has only an earthly end, that intelligence was only given to him to better satisfy his appetites; and that consequently society must be organized in such a way that it manages to procure for all the greatest possible amount of worldly and camel satisfactions . Not only is there division, but there is conflict; obvious conflict since the Renaissance, secret conflict since the origins of Christianity; for from the day when the Church strove to establish and propagate true civilization, it found before it the evil instincts of human nature to resist it. “We must put an end to this,” said Raoult Rigault, leading the hostages to the execution wall; This has been going on for eighteen hundred years, it is time for it to end. » We have to put an end to it! It was the word of Terror, it was the word of the Commune. This is the word of Waldeck-Rousseau. The two youths, the two societies must collide in a supreme conflict; One, carried away by the broad current of the Revolution, the other supported and pushed by the breath of the Holy Spirit to meet the revolutionary waves. One must triumph over the other. Instructed by experience, the sect including AT. Waldeck-Rousseau has made herself the agent, using less bloodthirsty means to achieve her ends than in 93, because she believes them to be more effective. The first of these means was the annihilation of religious congregations. Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau, in the Toulouse speech, explained in these terms the reason for the priority to be given to the law which made them disappear: “Such a fact (the coexistence of two youths, of two societies) cannot be It cannot be explained by the free play of opinions: it presupposes a substratum of influences formerly more hidden and today more visible, a power which is not even occult, and the constitution in the State of a rival power. » This substratum of influences, this rival power, which Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau thus denounced, he claimed to find in the religious congregations. “This,” he continued, “is an intolerable situation and one that all administrative measures have been powerless to make disappear. All efforts will be in vain, as long as rational, effective legislation has not been replaced by legislation that is at the same time illogical, arbitrary and ineffective. » This effective legislation, Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau, in concert with Parliament, gave it to us. It had been studied at length, skilfully prepared in the dressing rooms for the effect to be obtained; it was voted on and promulgated without incident in all its points, and subsequently perfected by decrees, decrees and measures which seem to no longer leave in France any refuge for monastic life and soon for religious information. However, the annihilation of the congregations does not end the conflict. Mr. Waldeck was not unaware of this. He was also careful to say that “the law of associations is only a starting point”. And in fact, let us suppose the congregations disappeared, all without hope of resurrection: it would be naive to believe that the Christian idea will disappear with them. Behind their battalions is the Holy Catholic Church. And it is the Church which says, not only to the Cogregaganists, but to all Christians and all men: “Your final end is not here below; suck higher. » It is in Her that we find, to speak as Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau, this substratum of influences which has continued to act for eighteen centuries. It is She who must be destroyed to kill the idea (1). Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau knows this, and that is why he presented his law as only a starting point. “The law on associations is, in our eyes, the starting point of the greatest and freest social evolution, and also the indispensable guarantee of the most necessary prerogatives of modern society. » A SOCIAL EVOLUTION, this, by Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau's own admission, is what is being prepared by the law that he then intended to present for the sanction of Parliament, and which is now in effect. The desired, pursued social evolution is, as we will see throughout the remainder of this work, the departure, without hope of return, from the paths of Christian civilization, and the march forward along the paths of civilization. pagan. How can the destruction of religious congregations be the “starting point”? Ah! it is that the sole presence of religious among the Christian people is a continual preaching which does not allow them to lose sight of the ultimate end of man, the main goal of society 1. On July 12, 1909, Mr. Clemenceau said from the tribune: "Nothing will be done in this country until we have changed the state of mind which the Catholic authority has introduced there” and the character which must have true civilization. Dressed in a special costume which marks who they are and what they pursue in this world, they tell the crowds among whom they circulate that we are all made for Heaven and that we must strive for it. To this silent preaching is added that of their works, works of dedication which do not require retribution here below, and which affirm through this disinterestedness that there is a better reward that all must aspire to. Finally, their teaching in schools and in the pulpit never ceases to sow in the souls of children, to make it grow in the souls of adults, to propagate in all directions, faith in eternal goods. Nothing that opposes more directly and more effectively the reestablishment of the pagan social order. Nothing for which the resurrection of this order, planned, desired, pursued for four centuries, requires a more rapid disappearance (1). So long that religious people have been 1. In the 15th century as today, monks were attacked by Renaissance humanists because they represented the Christian ideal of renunciation. The humanists pushed individualism to the point of selfishness; through their vow of obedience and stability, the monks fought and suppressed it. The humanists exalted the pride of the mind; the monks exalted voluntary humility and abjection. The humanists glorified wealth: the monks took a vow of poverty. Humanists, finally, legitimized sensual pleasure; the monks mortified their flesh through penance and chastity. The pagan Renaissance felt this opposition so well that it attacked the religious Orders with as much hatred as our modern sectarians. The more rigorous a religious observance was, the more it aroused the anger of humanism. (The Church and the Origins of Renaissance, by A. Jean GUÉRAUD, page 305. ) The encyclopedists had the same feelings towards the Religious as the humanists. On March 24, 1767, Frederick II, King of Prussia, wrote they believed 'they act, they teach, there are and there will be not only two youths, but two Frances, Catholic France and Masonic France, each having a different and even opposed ideal, fighting between them to see who will make theirs triumph. And as Masonry, as well as Catholicism, extends to the whole world, as everywhere the two Cities represent, everywhere we also see at the same time the same commitment in the same battle. Everywhere war is declared against religious people, everywhere the order is given to drive them out, to annihilate them. How many laws, how many decrees Freemasonry has had promulgated against them, in all countries, in the nineteenth century alone. But the annihilation of monastic life is and can only be, as Mr. Waldeck-Rousseau says, “only a starting point”. After the religious there remain the priests, and if the priests themselves were to be dispersed, the Church would remain, as in the days of the Catacombs, to maintain the faith in a certain number of families and in a certain number of hearts; and one day or another, the faith would call back priests and religious, as it did in 1800. Something more is therefore needed. First complete the enslavement of the Church, then annihilate it. Enslaving him was attempted by “the strict execution of the Concordat”; to annihilate it, we hope to achieve this through the law of separation of Church and State. to Voltaire: “I have noticed, and others like me, that the places where there are more convents of monks are those where the people are the most blindly attached to superstition (to Christianity). There is no doubt that if we succeed in destroying these asylums of fanaticism, the people will become a little indifferent and lukewarm on these objects which are currently those of their veneration. It would be a question of destroying the cloisters, at least of beginning to reduce their number...”
CHAPTER VIII
WHERE MODERN CIVILIZATION ENDS
The need to annihilate the Church to ensure the triumph of the modern civilization is what Mr. "Waldeck-Rousseau had given meaning in the Toulouse speech. This is what IL Viviani said brutally, on January 15, 1901, from the top of the rostrum. "We are responsible for preserving the heritage of the Revolution... We present ourselves here carrying in our hands, in addition to republican traditions, those French traditions attested by centuries of combat where, little by little, the secular spirit escaped the embraces of religious society... We are not only face to face with the congregations, we are face to face with the Catholic Church. Above this one-day fight, is it not true that this formidable conflict is once again encountered , where spiritual power and temporal power compete for sovereign prerogatives, trying, by fighting each other's consciences, to keep the direction of God to the end? As I said at the beginning, do you believe that this law leads us to the last battle? But this is only a skirmish compared to the battles of the past and the future! The truth is that, according to the beautiful expression of M. de Mun in 1878 (1), society founded on the will of man and society founded on the will of God meet here. The question is whether, in this battle, a law on Associations will be enough for us. The Congregations and the Church do not threaten you only by their actions, BUT BY THE SPREAD OF THE FAITH... Do not fear the battles that would be offered to you, go; and if you find in front of you this divine religion which poetizes suffering by promising future reparations, contrast it with the religion of humanity which also poetizes suffering by offering it the happiness of generations as a reward. : This is the question posed clearly. In these words we hear less the personal thoughts of Mr. Viviani than those of the anti-Christian sect. She claims to have been fighting against the Catholic Church for centuries: she boasts of having already achieved that the secular spirit gradually escapes the embraces of religious society; she knows that, in the effort made to destroy the congregations, she has only engaged in one skirmish, and that, to ensure a definitive triumph, she will have to fight new and numerous battles. In his name, Mr. Viviani declares that in the current battle, it is a question of anything other than “republican defense” on the one hand, and on the other hand acceptance of a form of government. Which
1. Or rather on May 22, 1875, at the time of the Catholic congress in Paris.
it is, here it is: “stealing the secular spirit from the embraces of religious society”, “taking the direction of humanity”, “and destroying the society founded on the will of God, to build a new society, based on the will of man (1). » This is why the war declared against the congregations is only a commitment. The real campaign is that which brings together the Catholic Church and the Masonic Temple, that is to say the Church of God and the Church of Satan, a formidable conflict on which the fate of humanity depends. As long as the Church stands, it will propagate the faith, it will put into the hearts of all those who suffer - and who does not suffer? — eternal hopes. It is therefore only on its ruins that “the religion of humanity” can be built, which promises happiness on this earth. The rest of the discussion, in the Senate as well as in the House, only accentuated the importance of these declarations… We know the slogan given by Gambetta: “Clericalism, that is the enemy!” » and under what circumstances. The center-right republic, inaugurated with the seven-year term of Marshal Mac-Mahon, had soon to be eclipsed by a center-left republic. Mr. Buffet had been replaced at the head of the ministry by Mr. Dufaure. Mr. Dufaure, tired of always having to resist the demands of the radicals, resigned. Mac-Mahon then called the left to power, in the person of Mr. Jules Simon. MJ Simon made to the extreme left the concessions that Mr. Dufaure had made to the left and Mr. Buffet to the center-left. Mac-Mahon then wanted to go upstream. On May 16, he sent MJ Simon a letter which the latter interpreted as a request for resignation. The president then charged Mr. de Broçlic with forming the Cabinet, and, on May 18, he sent a message to the Chambers where, after explaining his conduct, he adjourned them for one month, in accordance with article 24 of the Constitution . During this adjournment, June 1st. 1877, Gambetta received a delegation from the youth of the law schools, of which we have just said. Mr. Jacques Piou: “What the socialists want, Mr. Viviani said it bluntly the other day. It is to tear consciences away from spiritual power and conquer the leadership of humanity. » The speaker is interrupted by a member of the left who shouts to him: “It's not just the socialists who want it, it's all the republicans. » Mr. Piou does not contradict. He reads a speech in which Mr. Bourgeois had said:. “Since French thought was liberated, since the spirit of the Reformation, of Philosophy and of the Revolution entered the institutions of France, clericalism has been the enemy.” IL Bourgeois interrupts; Mr. Piou replies: “The quote I made is correct, and Mr. Bourgeois maintains it in its entirety. He maintains it, because it is the basis of his thoughts; she explains her ardor in supporting the law on associations, because the law on associations is vicdecine, etc., and he says to them a word which should never have been forgotten, because none throws, on the quarter century which has just passed and on the character of the current struggle, a clearer light. “We have,” he said, tried to fight for the form of government, for the integrity of the Constitution THE STRUGGLE IS DEEPER: THE struggle is against everything that remains of the old world. An Englishman, M . Bodley, after a long investigation made in. France, published under this title: LA FRANCE, Essay on the History and Operation of French Political Institutions. These words of Gambetta can be read on page 2 0 1. As for the battle cry “Clericalism, here is the enemy!” » Gambetta declared on the podium in 1 8 7 6 that he got it from Peyrat. Peyrat, in fact, had written, at the time of the empire, in the Opinion nationale, this sentence: “Catholicism, here is the enemy! » By substituting the word clericalism for the word Catholicism, Gambetta was using the hypocrisy familiar to Freemasons... » At the session of January 22, Mr. Lasies places the question on its true ground in these terms: “There are two sentences, I will say two acts, which dominate this entire debate. The first sentence was spoken by our honorable colleague Mr Viviani. He said: “War on Catholicism! » I stood up and replied: “Thank you, that’s frankness!” » Another word was spoken, and this one by the honorable Mr. Léon Bourgeois. At the invitation of Mr. Piou, Mr. Bourgeois affirmed again that the goal he pursues with his friends is to replace the spirit of the Church, that is to say the spirit of Catholicism , by the spirit of the Reformation, the spirit of the Revolution and the spirit of Reason. These words hover over the debate, they dominate it, and I want to address them head-on, because that is the whole question, free from the subterfuges of language and the hypocrisies of discussion. » On March 11, MC Pelletan also declared that the current struggle is linked to the great conflict between the rights of man and the rights of God, “This is the conflict which hovers above everything in this debate,” On June 28, At the end of the discussion, Father Gayraud believes it is necessary, before the vote, to remind the deputies what they are going to do, what they are going to vote on: “The law you are going to vote on is not a law. law of appeasement and pacification. We are deceiving the country with these words. It is a law of hatred against the Catholic Church. the tribune the war on THE Catholic FAITH." Mr. de Mun fulfills the same duty: "No one has forgotten the memorable speech of Mr. Viviani which will remain, despite the abundance of speeches and posters, the best understood of all. Mr. Viviani sees in the law the beginning of the war against the Catholic Church which is the alpha and omega of his party. In the report that the Official published this morning and which we had to read hastily, The honorable Mr. Trouillot says that the law of associations is the prelude to the separation of the Churches from the State, which must have as an essential corollary a general law on the policing of religions. The House and the country are therefore enlightened. It is open war declared against the Catholic Church. Because this general law on the policing of religions will only be a set of prescriptions likely to hinder, by all possible means, ministers of religion. » Mr. Viviani takes the podium to confirm the threat of Mr. Trouillot, who moreover only repeated what many ministers had said before him: "Seen during the sessions during which the Republican Party brought about the current project, however incomplete and imperfect its legal form was, we have fully adhered to it, with the firm intention of strengthening it in the future by new measures. » (Very good! very good! on the far left). What should these measures be? what should they aim for? Mr. Viviani said it: 'substitute the religion of humanity for the Catholic religion', or, in the words of Mr. Bourgeois, 'give to the spirit of the Revolution, of Philosophy and of the Reformation, victory over Catholic affirmation which shows the end of man beyond this world and the present life, and the spirit of Philosophy and the Revolution which is limit the horizon of humanity to animal and terrestrial life. If the words we have just reported had been spoken in a club or in a box, they would deserve consideration because of their seriousness. But that they were said from the platform, and repeated, again, almost six months apart, applauded by the vast majority of representatives of the people, and finally sanctioned by a law made in the spirit which dictations, this is certainly a serious subject for meditation. Mr. Viviani said: “We are not only in the presence of the Congregations, we are face to face with the Catholic Church”, to fight it, to wage a war of EXTERMINATION against it. » This thought has haunted the minds of God's enemies for a long time. For a long time they have flattered themselves that they can exterminate the Church. . In a letter written on February 25, 1758, Voltaire said: “Twenty more years and God will have a good time.” To police lieutenant Hérault, who reproached him for his impiety and told him: “No matter how much you do, whatever you write, you will not succeed in destroying the Christian religion", Voltaire replied: "That's what. we will see (1). » God had a good time against Voltaire. As for the Church, it is not twenty years ago, but a hundred and fifty years; and the Catholic Church is still standing. It will be the same today, although they
1. Condorcet. Life of Voltaire.
believe that they have taken their measures better this time. On January 15, 1881, the Journal de Genève published a conversation between its Paris correspondent and one of the leaders of the Freemason majority which then, as today, dominated the Chamber of Deputies. He said: “At the bottom of all this (of all these laws promulgated one after the other), there is a dominant inspiration, a fixed and methodical plan, which takes place with more or less order, delay, but with invincible logic. What we are doing is the formal seat of Roman Catholicism, taking our fulcrum in the Concordat. We want to make it capitulate or break it. We know where its strengths are, and that's where we want to reach it. » In 1886, in the January 23 issue of the Cambrai Religious Week, we reported these other words which had been said in Lille: “We will mercilessly pursue the clergy and everything that touches religion. We will use means against Catholicism that it does not even suspect. We will make genius efforts to ensure that it disappears from this world. If it nevertheless happened that he resisted this scientific war, I would be the first to declare that he is of divine essence. » MG de Pascal, writing in the Revue catholique et royaliste, issue of March 1908, said: “Many years ago, Cardinal Mermillod told me a story which describes the situation well, when he was still in Geneva: the illustrious Prelate saw from time to time Prince Jérôme Bonaparte who lived in the land of Prangins. The revolutionary prince greatly enjoyed the conversation of the witty bishop. One day he said to her: “I am not a friend of the Catholic Church, I do not believe in its divine origin, but knowing what is being plotted against it, the efforts admirably executed against its existence ; if it resists this assault, I will be obliged to admit that there is something there that goes beyond the human. » In June 1903, La Vérité Française reported that Mr. Ribot, in an intimate conversation, had spoken similarly: “I know this thing is being prepared; I know by lying the meshes of the vast net that is stretched. Well, if the Roman Church escapes this time in France, it will be a miracle, a miracle so dazzling in my eyes that I will become a Catholic with you. » () This miracle, we have seen it in the past, we will see it in the future. The Jacobins could believe themselves as sure, even more sure of success, than our free-thinkers; they had to admit that they had been wrong... and they did not convert. “I saw,” says Barruel, “in his Memoirs (2), I saw Cerutti insolently approach the secretary of the Nuncio of Pius VI, and in impious joy, with a smile of pity, say to him: “Take care your Pope; keep this one well, and embalm it well after its death, because, I tell you, and you can be sure of it, you will not have another. » He did not guess then, this so-called prophet, continues Barruel, that he would appear before Pius VI before the God who, despite the storms of Jacobinism, as despite so many others, will no less be with Peter and his Church until the end of the centuries.”
1. In the session of November 8, 1901, in the Senate, Mr. Ribot said: “We will maintain the secular school as a necessary instrument of progress and civilization. » By speaking thus, Mr. Ribot no longer showed himself only as one of the initiates, but as being part of the conspiracy. 2 Volume V, p. 208.
Mr. Viviani said that if Masonry wanted to annihilate the Church, it was in order to be able to substitute the religion of Christ for the religion of humanity. Constituting a new religion, the “religion of humanity”, is, in fact, as we will see, the end to which Freemasonry wants to bring about the movement begun in the Renaissance: the emancipation of humanity. In a work published in Friborg under this title: "The deification of humanity, or the positive side of Freemasonry, Father Patchtler has clearly shown the meaning that Masonry gives to the word "humanity" and the use she makes of it. . “This word,” he said, “is used by thousands of men (initiates or unconscious echoes of initiates), in a confused sense, no doubt, but always, however, as the nom de guerre of a certain party for a certain goal, which is opposition to positive Christianity. This word, in their mouth, does not only mean the human being as opposed to the bestial being... it posits, as a thesis, the absolute independence of man in the intellectual, religious and political domain; for him he denies any supernatural end, and demands that the purely natural perfection of the human race be channeled towards the paths of progress. These three errors correspond to three stages on the path of evil: Humanity without God, Humanity becoming God, Humanity against God. This is the building that masonry wants to raise in place of the divine order which is Humanity with God. » When the sect speaks of the religion of the future, of the religion of humanity, it is this building, this Temple that it has in mind. In 1870, at the end of July and the beginning of August, a holiday, in which the lodges of Strasbourg, Nancy, Vesoul, Metz, Châlons-sur-Marne, Reims, Mulhouse, Sarreguemines, all of the East took part in a word, was held in Metz. The question of the “Supreme Being” was posed there, and the discussions which followed spread from lodge to lodge. To put an end to it, the Masonic World, January and May issues, made this declaration: “Freemasonry teaches us that there is only one religion, one true, and therefore only one natural, the cult of Humanity. For, my brothers, this abstraction which, erected into a system, has served to form all religions, God is nothing other than the set of all our highest instincts, to which we have given a body, a distinct existence; this God is finally only the product of a generous, but erroneous, conception of humanity, which has stripped itself for the benefit of a chimera. » Nothing could be clearer: humanity is God, human rights must be substituted for divine law, the cult of man's instincts must take the place of that rendered to the Creator, the search for progress in the satisfactions to be given to the senses, replacing aspirations towards the future life. At a joint session of the lodges of Lyon, held on May 3, 1882 and the report of which was published in the Chaîne d'Union of August 1882, Brother Régnier said: "We must not ignore what is no longer a mystery: that for a long time two armies have been present, that the struggle is currently open in France, in Italy, in Belgium, in Spain, between light and ignorance, and that one will be right to the other. We must know that the General Staffs, the leaders of these armies, are on one side the Jesuits (read the clergy, secular and regular) and on the other the Freemasons. » But the destruction of the Church will not make way sufficiently clear for the construction of the Masonic Temple; also, to the clamors against the Church, there are always cries no less hateful against the social order, against the family and against property. And it must be so, because the truths of the religious order have entered into the very substance of these institutions. Society rests on authority which has its principle in God; the family, on marriage which derives its legitimacy and indissolubility from divine blessing; property, on the will of God who promulgated the seventh and tenth commandments to protect it against theft and even against covetousness. This is all that must be destroyed if we want, as the sect claims, to found civilization on new foundations. Leo XIII noted this, in his Encyclical Humanum genus: “What the Freemasons propose, he says, what all their efforts are aimed at, is to completely destroy all the religious and social discipline born of the institutions Christian, and to substitute another, adapted to their ideas, and whose principle and fundamental laws are drawn from naturalism.” The ideas and projects presented on the platform and in the boxes are the expression of a thought and a will that is found everywhere. France, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy. Germany, hear them at all democratic Congresses, read them every day in a multitude of newspapers. In 1865, the students' congress was held in Liège. It was from this congress that the staff of the international was first drawn, then Gambetta's auxiliaries. More than a thousand young people, coming from Germany, Spain, Holland, England, France, Russia, were present there. They showed themselves unanimous in their feelings of hatred against Catholic dogmas and even against Catholic morality; unanimity of adherence to the doctrines and acts of the French Revolution, including the massacres of 1793; unanimity of hatred against the current social order, "which does not have two institutions based on justice", a word pronounced from the platform by Mr. Arnoult, editor of the Precursor of Antwerp, and applauded excessively by the assembly. Another speaker, Mr. Fontaine, from Brussels, ended his speech with these words: “We, revolutionaries and socialists, we want the physical, moral and intellectual development of humankind. Note that I say physical first, intellectual later. We want, in the moral order, by Vanishing the prejudices of religion and church, to arrive at the negation of God and free examination. We want, in the political order, through the realization of the republican idea, to achieve the federation of peoples and the solidarity of individuals. In the social order, we want, through the transformation of property, through the abolition of heredity, through the application of the principles of association, through mutuality, to achieve solidarity of interests and justice! We want, through the emancipation of the worker first, then the citizen and the individual, and without distinction of class, the abolition of all authoritarian systems. » Others spoke along the same lines. This is because the annihilation of Christianity cannot be conceived, without the ruin of all the institutions born from it and founded on it; logical men understand it, frank men say it, anarchists will execute. At this same Liège congress, Lafargue asked: “What is the Revolution?” » And he answered. “The Revolution is the triumph of work over capital, of the worker over the parasite, of man over God. This is the Social Revolution that the principles of 89 entail, Human Rights taken to their final expression. » He said again: <v We have been undermining Catholicism for four hundred years, the strongest machine that has been invented in terms of spiritualism: it is still solid, unfortunately! »' Then, in the last session, he uttered this cry from hell: “War on God! Hate to God! PROGRESS IS HERE! We must pierce the sky known as a vault of paper. » Lafargue's conclusion was: In the presence of a principle as great, as pure as this one (also free from the supernatural and from everything which has until now constituted the social order), it is necessary to hate or prove that 'WE love. » Other French people also demanded that the separation be made clearer and more complete between those who hate and those who love, those who hate evil and love good, and those who hate good and love evil. A. Regnard, Parisian, came to say where masonry places evil and good: evil in spiritualism, good in materialism. “We attach our flag to men who proclaim materialism: every man who is for progress is also for positive or materialist philosophy. » When these words “progress” and other similar fall from Masonic lips, there are Catholics who receive them with a sort of respect and naive confidence, believing they see in them aspirations towards a desirable state of affairs. Lafargue and Régnard have just told us what the sect, which put them into circulation, intended to introduce. Germain Casse: “It is necessary that when we leave here we are from PARIS or ROME, or Jesuits, or revolutionaries. » And as a sanction, he demands “the total, complete exclusion of any individual who represents, to whatever degree, the religious idea.” » Necessary condition for the new order of things desired and pursued to be established and, above all, to subsist. There is no point in prolonging these quotes, stenographed by the editors of the Gazette de Liège on the very tables of the congress. Other newspapers were afraid to reproduce these words in their beautiful crudeness. Citizen Fontaine reminded them to respect the truth: Only one newspaper, he said, only one was good, it was the Gazette de Liège, and that because it is, frankly, Catholic. , apostolic and Roman. She published a comprehensive analysis of the debates. » The following year, at the Congress of Brussels, citizen Sibrac, French, appealed to women for the great work; and to lead them he said to them: “It was Eve who uttered the first cry of revolt against God. » We know that one of the cries of admiration of Freemasonry is: “Eva! Eva! » There, again the citizen Brismée, says: “If property resists the Revolution, it is necessary, by decrees of the people, to destroy property. If the bourgeoisie resists, the bourgeoisie must be killed. » And the Pilgrim citizen: “If six hundred thousand heads stand in the way, let them fall!” » or FINISHES MODERN CIVILIZATION After the congresses of Liège and Brussels, there was one in Geneva, composed of students and workers as in Brussels. There too, God and religion were excluded by mutual agreement, religious ideas were declared fatal to the people and contrary to human dignity, morality was proclaimed independent of religion. There was talk of organizing “huge, invincible” strikes, ending in a GENERAL STRIKE. Let's abbreviate. Another international congress took place in The Hague in 1872. Citizen Vaillant also said there that the war against Catholicism and God could not go without the war on property and owners. “The bourgeoisie,” he said, “must expect a more serious war than the latent struggle to which the International is currently condemned. And it will not be long before the day of revenge of the Paris Commune! » Complete extermination of the bourgeoisie: this must be the first act of the future social revolution (1). » If we wanted to give an idea of what has been said and what has been printed in the last thirty years, we would be infinite. It is widely known that the republican regime, especially in recent times, has let in, or even propagated, the most subversive ideas in all layers of society. 1. Those who desire more numerous and more extensive citations can find them in the work Secret Societies and Society, by N. Deschamps, continued by M. Claudio Jannet.
CHAPTER IX
IT IS FREEMASONRY WHICH WAGES THE WAR AGAINST CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION
Following the publication of the Encyclical, in which Leo XIII again denounced Freemasonry to the world as being the secret agent of the ruin to the Church and to the entire social order, the Bulletin of the great Scottish symbolic Lodge expressed the thoughts of the sect in these terms: “Freemasonry cannot do so less than thank the Sovereign Pontiff for his last encyclical, Leo XIII, with incontestable authority and a great wealth of proofs, has just demonstrated, once again, that there exists an insurmountable abyss between the Church, of which he is the representative, and the Revolution, of which Freemasonry is the right arm. It is good for those who are hesitant to stop harboring vain hopes. Everyone must get used to understanding that the time has come to OPT between the old order, which is based on Revelation, and the new order which recognizes no other foundation than science and human reason, between , the spirit of authority and the spirit of freedom (1).” 1. Quoted BY Duo SARDA Y SALVANY.
This thought was expressed again at the Convent of 1902, by the speaker responsible for delivering the closing speech: “. What separates us? It is an abyss, an abyss which will only be filled on the day when masonry, tireless worker of democratic progress and social justice, triumphs... Until then, no truce, no rest, no rapprochement, no concessions.. This is the last phase of the struggle of the Church and the Congregation against our republican and secular society. THE EFFORT MUST BE SUPREME..” Once the Church is overthrown, everything else will collapse. Also, La Lanterne, the unofficial organ of our rulers and of Freemasonry, has since continued to say every day and in all tones: “Before any other question, before the social question, before the political question , we must put an end to the clerical question. This is the key to everything else. If we committed the crime of capitulating, slowing down our action, letting the adversary escape, it would soon be over for both the Republican Party and the Republic. The Church would not allow us to repeat the experience. She knows today that the Republic will be fatal to her, and if it does not kill her, it is she who will kill the Republic. Between the Republic and the Church, it is a duel to the death. Let us hasten to crush the world, or let us resign ourselves to allowing freedom to be stifled for centuries. » An event which has just occurred shows in summary what will be exposed in the second and third parts of this book: how the sect acts to achieve the realization of its designs. On a vain pretext, a revolt occurs in Barcelona [see: Barcelona Tragic Week - 1909], fires and massacres force the Spanish government to put the city under siege... The instigator Ferrer is seized. Instead of shooting him on the spot, he was handed over to the military tribunal which sentenced him to death. The judgment is ratified. Lying dispatches were sent to newspapers in all countries: Ferrer was not tried according to the law. His defender was arrested. The clergy and the Pope himself are implicated. “The bloody hand of the Church, party to the trial,” writes La Lanterne, “has led everything; and the thugs of the King of Spain only carry out his wishes. All people must revolt against this religion of murder and blood. » In support, a caricature represents a priest, a dagger in his hand. Threats of reprisals and assassination of the king and the Pope rained down in Madrid and Rome. Petitions are circulating in Paris, Rome, Brussels, London and Berlin to protest against the judgment. Ferrer is executed. Immediately demonstrations, several of which were bloody, took place in the main cities of France and all European countries. To top it off, a sort of triumph wants to glorify him in the streets of Paris, under the cover of the police, with the participation of the army, to the song of the International. The leaders are questioned in the various parliaments, protests are signed by the departmental and municipal councils. Fifty-seven towns in France decide to give the name Ferrer to one of their streets. The spontaneity and prodigious ensemble of these demonstrations for a cause foreign to the interests of the various countries, indicate an organization extending to all peoples, and having action even in their most humble localities. Among the documents from the Barcelona trial, there are some which establish that Ferrer belonged to the Grand International Lodge, the mysterious center from which the occult power of Masonry is exercised on the world. But now the sect denounces itself. The council of the order of the Grand-Orient of Paris sent to all its workshops and to all the Masonic powers of the world, a manifesto of protest against the execution of Ferrer. There he claimed the garbage collector as one of his own: “Ferrer was one of us. He felt that in Masonic work the highest ideal that it is given to man to achieve was expressed. He affirmed our principles until the end. What we wanted to achieve in him was the Masonic ideal: “In front of the march of indefinite progress of humanity there has arisen a stopping force whose principles and action aim to throw us back into the night of the middle ages. » The Grand Orient of Belgium, hastened to respond to the manifesto of the Grand Orient of France: “The Grand Orient of Belgium, sharing the noble sentiments which inspired the proclamation of the Grand Orient of France, associates itself, in the name of the Belgian Lodges, to the indignant protest that he addressed to universal Masonry and to the civilized world against the unfair sentence pronounced and mercilessly executed with regard to Brother Francisco Ferrer." The Italian Grand Orient and undoubtedly others did the same: “François Ferrer, honor of modern culture and thought, tireless apostle of the secular idea, was shot by order of the Jesuits, in the horrible dungeon of the fortress of Montjuic, still resounding with the cries of countless victims... A shudder of horror ran through the world, which, in a sublime outburst of human solidarity, says the proven and occult authors of murder and dooms them to execration and infamy. » The central committee of the Masonic League for Human Rights, meeting in extraordinary session on October 13, 1909, decided to erect a monument in memory of Ferrer “martyr of free thought and the democratic ideal." He invited all free-thinking organizations to contribute to the realization of this project, and resolved to raise it in Montmartre, opposite the Sacré-Coeur church. Freemasonry therefore declared in word and deed that it considered Ferrer and defended him as the embodiment of the "Masonic ideal." What was Ferrer's ideal? He himself made it known in May 1907 in the educational journal Humanidad Nueva where he exposed the principles of the “Modern School” which he had just founded with money not loyally obtained from a practicing Catholic and even pious. “When we had, six years ago, the great joy of opening the Modern School of Barcelona, we hastened to make it known that its teaching system would be rationalist and scientific. We wanted to warn the public that, science and reason being the antidotes of all dogma, we would not teach any religion in our school..." The more we were shown the temerity that we had in placing ourselves so frankly in front of the almighty Church in Spain, the more courage we felt to persevere in our projects. » It is however necessary to make it known that the mission of the modern School is not limited only to the Church. There is a desire to see the religious prejudices of people disappear. Although these prejudices are among those which are most opposed to the intellectual emancipation of individuals, we will not obtain, with their disappearance, a free and happy humanity, since we can conceive of a people without religion, but also without freedom. » If the working classes freed themselves from religious prejudices and preserved that of property as it exists today, if the workers constantly believed in the parable that there will always be poor and rich, if rationalist teaching was content to spread notions about hygiene and science and to prepare only good apprentices, good workers, good employees of all professions, we would continue to live more or less healthy and robust with the modest food what our modest salary would provide us, but we would not always cease to be the slaves of capital. » The Modern School therefore claims to combat all the prejudices which oppose the total emancipation of the individual and it has adopted, for this purpose, humanitarian rationalism which consists of instilling in youth the desire to know the origin of all social injustices so that she can combat them using the knowledge she has acquired. » Our rationalism combats fratricidal wars, whether internal or external, the exploitation of man by man; he fights against the state of servitude in which women find themselves currently placed within our society; In a word, he fights all the enemies of universal harmony, such as ignorance, wickedness, pride and all vices, and defects which divide men into two classes: the exploiters and the exploited. » In a letter addressed to one of his friends, Ferrer demonstrated the thinking of his school even better. “In order not to frighten people and not to provide the government with a pretext to close my establishments, I call them “Modern School” and not “School of anarchists.” » Because the aim of my propaganda is, I frankly admit, to train convinced anarchists in my schools. My wish is. to call the revolution. For the moment, however, we must content ourselves with implanting in the brains of young people the idea of violent upheaval. She must learn that there is only one way against the gendarmes and tonsure. the bomb and the poison. » The investigation of the trial led to the discovery at the villa '(Germinal') where he lived, documents hidden in a cleverly concealed underground space with several exit doors. They proved that he was the soul of all the revolutionary movements which have occurred in Spain since 1872. Here, among other things, are extracts from circulars written in 1892: "Companions, let us be men, let us crush these infamous bourgeois... Before building, let us ruin everything... If, among the politicians, some - some appeal to your humanity, kill them.. Abolition of all laws.. expulsion of all religious communities.. Dissolution of the Magistrates, the Army and the Navy.. Demolition of churches.. Finally, in Ferrer's own hand, this note I enclose a recipe for making panclastite”. This is the man that Freemasonry presented to the world as professing its IDEAL AGAINST CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION. A few days after Ferrer's execution, the Madrid cabinet was forced to resign, the leaders of the Liberal Party and the Democratic Party, no doubt obeying the injunctions of the Lodge, informed Mr. Maura [Antonio Maura, PM of Spain in 1903-1904] that they would make a irreducible obstruction to any measure, to any project that he might present. However, in Spain, without at least two thirds of the votes, everything can always be stopped and becomes legally impossible. The Liberal Party and the Democratic Party now refusing their assistance, administration became impossible. This resignation brought joy to freethinkers and atheists throughout Europe. The Action said: "Isn't a great duel, everywhere the same, taking place throughout the world between Religions and Free Thought, between Autocracy and Democracy, between Absolutism and the revolution? Are there borders for the Church and a homeland for the Vatican? Isn't the drama of humanity being played out around these international forces which are the Convent and the School? The fall of the Maura cabinet, as well as the execution of Ferrer, will have been only one of the episodes of this great incessant drama. » We dwelt on this fact. Nothing could better prepare the reader to understand what follows: the history of Masonic action in France over the last two centuries, the presentation of the organization of the sect, its means of action and its processes, conjectures on the outcome of the struggle between the synagogue of Satan and the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ.