On Tuesday, 12 September 2006, the Pope presented a lecture to the Aula Magna of the University of Regensburg. In his lecture, the Pope began by defaming Moslems. I will analyze the apparent purpose of the lecture, its true intent, and I will open questions as to how and why it came about.
The Pope opens his lecture by defaming Islam with the smear that all which is new in the religion is "evil and inhuman" and that Mohammed allegedly commanded that the faith he taught be spread by the sword—as opposed to the humane "reason" which is the basis of Christianity. The Pope makes no mention of the historical actions of the Roman Catholic Church to spread Christianity by the sword, nor does the Pope acknowledge the evil and inhumanity present in other religions, but instead directly targets Islam for an unsubstantiated assault. The Pope does not present any evidence to support the conclusion to which he leads his listeners, by quoting a Fourteenth Century source hostile to Islam, nor does the Pope repudiate the empty assertions he has parroted.
Why was it necessary to defame Islam in this way in this lecture? The Pope attempts to justify his attack, but concedes the contrived nature of his justifications. The Pope states that he was reminded of his theme that Christianity depends upon a form of reason which is broader than the positivistic restrictions of empirical science, reminded only "recently" when he read Theodore Khoury's edition of a Fourteenth Century dialogue between the Byzantine Emperor Manuell II Paleologus and his "Persian interlocutor". What occasioned this reading?
The Pope immediately dismisses the bulk of the conversation, but instead focuses on a sole issue which can used to defame Moslems, an issue the Pope concedes is "rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole", but which can be used to open the Pope's open assault on the Moslems of the world. The argument the Pope presents to shroud his vicious attack on Moslems in a cloak of scholarly pontificating, whom the Pope effectively dubs non-European and antagonistic to reason, progress and the mighty European way, whom the Pope subtly implies by trickery of language are hellish idol worshipers; the argument is that reason is Godly and that the essence of reason is far broader than the narrow restrictions of empirical science, which requires that a theory be falsifiable through physical experiment.
The Pope is excusing blind faith as a reasonable belief, which need not be proven beyond its internal logical consistency, and which cannot be contradicted by physical facts. This is all well and good, though it is presented in a typically unenlightened and sophomoric appeal to the trite proclamations of the Eleatics and Cabalistic writers, such as Parmenides who both said that God is, and God is all, which outright pantheism Cabalistic Judaism repeats, and which Eleatic belief in the unity of all things in time was copied by ancient Jews in the proclamation of their God, "I am". Parmenides also entreated us to accept that the rational is the real, and the real is the rational—another theme adopted in the Cabalistic Zohar, and reiterated by Hegel—a more modern advocate of the Logos as the basis of knowledge and substance.
The Pope reflects upon the true meaning of John's opening words which declare that God is the Logos; which word has been incorrectly translated as "word", as in the Bible as God. The Pope, however, restores some of the import to the word "Logos" by giving the classic neo-Platonic definition of the term as "reason", while neglecting the dialectic Heraclitian definition which preceded and which superceded the Platonic, that of unity in contradiction and of perpetual change, whereby the term Logos is defined as never ending fire and change. Suffice it to say that the Pope's arguments are trite and shallow and nothing more than an excuse to hide behind while defaming Moslems. His reference in such a context to the Fourteenth Century dialogue is not even obscure, rather his subsequent diatribe is meant to obscure his attack in a cowardly and vicious manner, and to add fuel to the fire by offering the Pope the opportunity to smear Moslems as if non-European irrational barbarians, who allegedly act and think "contrary to God's nature."
The Pope appears to be steering the Catholic Church towards the Cabala, which itself is a rather primitive rehashing of Eleatic pantheism. The Pope appears to be steering the Catholic Church towards the Noahide Laws. The Pope is obviously spreading hatred and fomenting conflict. But why is the Pope acting like a Cabalistic Jew? Could it be that when the Rothschild's took over Rome, the Vatican and the Catholic Church, through debt and with the intent to destroy it and bleed off the wealth of Catholic nations like France, could it be that they also bought the loyalty and the voice of the Papacy?
The Chicago Tribune reported on 27 February 1867 on page 2,
[Rome Correspondence of the London News.]
Who, whether he has set foot in the Eternal City or no, has not heard of the Torlonias—the Rothschilds of Rome? In the course of last summer, when the monetary crisis here was at its height, Don Alessandro Torlonia—the acting head of the house—won extraordinary popularity by writing a letter to the Pope, in which he offered to buy up the unconvertible Government paper, and substituting a metal currency in its place, providing that the existing managers of the Roman Bank, with Cardinal Antonelli's brother at their head, were sent about their business, and the direction confided to himself. At that time it was quite impossible to get notes converted into coin at any price for the simple reason that there was no coin in the bank. Even now, when things have improved somewhat, it is with the utmost difficulty that you can get change for a scudi note, even at shops in the Corso, and there is not a hotel keeper or a tradesman in Rome who would even look at a five scudi note if you were sufficiently ignorant of the state of things here to present it in payment in the expectation of getting any change out. Of the small pieces of silver, which you obtain with no little difficulty, many are so worn and thin that they seem in a sort of transition state between sliver and paper, and have long since lost all trace of any image or superscription whatever.
So rolling in wealth is Don Alessandro Torlonia that his riches are admitted to be literally untold, and only this much is known certain, that everything in Rome worth having, except the Pope and St. Peter's, already belongs to him. No wonder then that at the Vatican Don Alessandro should be looked upon as a hardly less dangerous character than Victor Emanuel himself, and that the insulting offer which he made last summer to buy up the Holy Father, and add him so his possessions, should have been decidedly rejected, though it had not entailed the removal of an Antonelli from a lucrative place. On his first appearance in public after making the above mentioned patriotic offer, Don Alessandro received such an ovation as has not been witnessed in Rome since those of which Pius IX. was himself the object, when he gave the first impulse to the Italian Revolution in 1846. This Don Alessandro is the same Torlonia who risked his whole fortune on the gigantic enterprise of draining the Fucine Lake, the issue of which struggle with nature was so long doubtful that it became a common saying in Rome, 'Either Torlonia will drain the Fucine Lake, or the Fucine will drain Torlonia.' In the end, however, Torlonia got the better of the lake, and redeemed about one hundred thousand acres of land for cultivation. Over what was a few years ago a barren waste of waters, flourishing crops may now be seen waving every harvest time, and with last year's produce Don Alessandro had a scheme of feeding the now almost starving Roman people by selling them bread of his own baking at a reduced rate. Such, at least, was the account of the story given me by a patriotic and exceedingly liberal Roman, who made a severe case against the Government out of the stoppage of Torlonia's extensive bread baking-by-machinery works, which threw some two hundred workmen out of employment just a fortnight ago. I am bound, however, to add that, on proceeding to the spot and making inquiries, I learned quite a different version of the affair, entirely exculpating the Government from any direct interference in the matter. Only this much is certain, that the works are stopped, and that the Roman people stand little chance, at present, of getting their bread at reduced rates."
On 2 June 1867, The Chicago Tribune reported on page 3,
For fifteen centuries the Jews have been cursed by the Pope, and persecuted by the Roman Church. There is no more revolting chapter of horrors in history than that of the treatment of the Jews at the hands of the Pontiffs. In all lands where the Roman religion is dominant the children of Israel have been treated with barbaric rigor—allowed few privileges, denied all rights, looked upon as a people accursed of God, and set apart by divine ordination to be trampled upon by the church. In Rome, at the present day, the Jews are confined to the Ghetto; they are not allowed to set up a shop in any other part of the city; they cannot leave the city without a permit; they can engage only in certain trades; they are compelled to pay enormous taxes into the Papal treasury; the are subject to a stringent code of laws established by the Pope for their special government; they are imprisoned and fined for the most trivial of offences. They cannot own any real estate in the city; cannot build or tear down or remodel any dwelling or change their place of business, without Papal permission. They are in abject slavery, with no right whatever, and entitled to no privileges, and receive none, except upon the gracious condescension of the Pope. In former times they were unmercifully whipped and compelled to listen once a week to the Christian doctrine of the priests. But time is bringing changes. The Pope is in want of money; and the house of the red shield has money to lend on good security. The house is always ready to accommodate Governments. Italy wants money, so she sells her fine system of railroads to the Rothschilds. The Pope wants money, and he sends his Nuncio to the wealthy house of the despised race, offers them security on the property of the church, the Compagna, and receives ten million dollars to maintain his army and Imperial State. That was in 1865. A year passes, and the Pontificial expenditures are five million more than the income, and the deficit is made up by the Rothschilds, who take a second security at a higher rate of interest. Another year has passed and there is a third great annual vacuum in the Papal treasury of six million, which quite likely will be filled by the same house. The firm can do it with as much ease as your readers can pay their yearly subscription to the weekly Journal. When will the Pope redeem his loan at the rate he is going? Never. Manifestly the day is not far distant when these representatives of the persecuted race will have all the available property of the Church in their possession. Surely time works wonders."
On 24 December 1893, The Chicago Daily Tribune reported, on page 6,
Economy Necessary Because of the Continual
Decrease in the Revenues.
Since the heavy losses made by the Pope a year or more ago the finances of the Vatican have been superintended with great care. 'It is known,' says a Paris paper, 'that a committee of prelates and several Cardinals exists at Rome whose duty it is to regulate the use of the sums of money which flow into the treasury of the Vatican. These sums come principally from two sources: The revenues of the property possessed by the Pope and the gifts of the faithful, known as Peter's Pence. The property of the Vatican is of various kinds, but the greater part of it consists of money or bonds, placed in England and France, under control of the Paris house of Rothschild. Peter's Pence is an annual revenue which far from being fixed. In good years the total of the sum received from all countries of the world reaches 8,000,000 francs. Sometimes it is as low as 6,000,000 and even 5,000,000. This has been the case for the last five years. This diminution is due, in great part, to the discord between the Royalists and the French Catholics produced by the republican policy of the Pope. France alone furnished two-thirds and often three-quarters of Peter's Pence. And in France it is the royalists who prove themselves most generous. But since the adhesion of Leo XIII. to the republic many of them, more Royalist than Catholic, have closed their purses to the Pope. However, despite all this, French Bishops still forward the largest sums to his Holiness. Thus, the Bishop of Nante sent a few days ago 100,000 francs from his flock as their gift to the Vatican treasury.
'Italy,' adds the Journal, 'contributes only a small part of the revenue—a few hundred thousand francs a year. The Romans show themselves in this regard less generous than other Italians. On the other hand, the Anglo-Saxon countries—England, Ireland, Australia, and the United States—begin to send important sums. If Catholicism continues to grow in these countries, it is easy to see that in time the Vatican will draw considerable sums from them.
'Again, there are the royal courts, such as that of Austria, which send annually rich presents to the Pope. This is even true of princes of ancient Italian families. Francis II., ex-King of Naples, and Maria Theresa, formerly Grand-Duchess of Tuscany, never fail to send their offerings, which consist of several thousands of francs. The Comte de Chambord was accustomed to give annually 50,000 francs; the Count of Paris sends the same sum.
'The expenses of the Vatican,' continues the writer, 'amount annually to more than 7,000,000 francs. They are regulated as follows: for the personal wants of the Pope, 500,000 francs; for the Cardinals, 700,000; for poor dioceses, 400,000; administration of the Vatican, 1,800,000; Secretary of State, 1,000,000; employés and ablegates, 1,500,000; support of schools and poor, 1,200,000.
'The Cardinals at Rome live at the expense of the Pope. The income of each from this source is at least 22,000 francs. The Secretary of State is charged with upholding relations with foreign governments by the mediation of nuncios. The four most important—Paris, Vienna, Madrid, and Lisbon—each receive an allowance of 60,000 francs a year.
'The last jubilee of Pope Leo XIII. brought to the Vatican 3,000,000 francs. At the first, celebrated five years ago, 12,000,000 francs were received. In the course of years the Pope has introduced a number of economies in the different branches of the Vatican service, and for that reason he has been called miserly. This accusation is not merited; the economies became necessary in a State whose expenses are considerable and whose revenues continue to diminish. Leo XIII. has many reasons to follow the example of his illustrious predecessor, Sixtus, as it is difficult in the present time to count on the generosity of the faithful.'"
The utter hypocrisy of the Pope's attack on the Moslems of the world, and the many logical failures of his arguments, are not worth addressing in detail at this time.