Cardinal Rampolla Was a Freemason?
By the Abbe Francesco Ricossa

via GOOGLE TRANSLATE

Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro (1843 - 1913) was papal nuncio in Spain When Leo XIII created him cardinal and took to the Secretary of State (1887), Cardinal Rampolla performs this delicate charge until the death of Leo XIII in 1903. The conclave opened with the death of the Pontiff, the Austrian Emperor Franz Joseph vetoed through Cardinal Archbishop of Krakow, Puzyna, the election of Cardinal Rampolla to Papal see. Under the pontificate of St. Pius X, Rampolla, replaced by Cardinal Merry del Val to the office of secretary State continued to hold office in the various Roman Congregations to which he belonged (including as Secretary of the Congregation of the Holy Office). He was considered a successor possible to St. Pius X, but he died less than a year before the holy pontiff. this is Monsignor Della Chiesa, pupil and collaborator of choice of Cardinal Rampolla, who was elected, and took the name Benedict XV (1).

In areas known as "traditionalists" (2) the common opinion, considered virtually historical certainty as indubitable is that Cardinal Rampolla was actually affiliated with the masonry. In this paper I wonder if this view is founded, and what arguments and docuмents it may be possible based then to show what was in my opinion, the real mistake of the "school" of Cardinal Rampolla, especially during and after the pontificate of St. Pius X.

This item is in perfect continuity Sodalitium with what has already written in other occasions (No. 19/1989, pp. 30-44, No. 49/1999, editorial), demonstrating that a material very important and sensitive than Masonic infiltration in the Church our review follows a consistent and serious an equilibrium line.

Masonic infiltration in the Church

Certainly, it is not as irreverent ask a similar question about a prince of the church, which was, without doubt, Cardinal Rampolla.

In a former number Sodalitium (No. 36, pp. 44 - 58), I had the opportunity to discuss events that affected several conclaves of the sixteenth century, the heresy of Valdes was more or less influenced many cardinals (the most known, the Cardinals Pole and Morone) and it is few votes that they were not elected. It is precisely this circuмstance that Pope Paul IV (who had been incarcerated Cardinal Morone for heresy and provided for the possibility of acquittal in a subsequent pontificate, as is actually spent) promulgated in 1559 the famous Bull cuм ex apostolatus (cf. Sodalitium it. No. 14, No. 41 fr., p. 40. strong in Faith 42, 1976, pp. 405 ff) with the intent to block the road at a future conclave Cardinal Morone, or other suspected of heresy. The interesting feature the heresy of John Valdes, Marrano Spanish, it is postulated the need the "Nicomedia", that is to say to stay inside the church while hiding the possible positions and personal to operate within the reform. Four centuries later, modernism adopt the same modus operandi.

After the founding of the masonry Modern (London 1717), the prelates, even high prelates, were likely to join the sect, despite the condemnation and excommunication fulminated by Popes Clement XII (letter In apostolic prominent 1738) and Benoit XIV (constitution Provida, 1751).

Subsequently, the Catholic press has never failed to report that the abbot Emmanuel Barbier called "infiltration Masonic in the Church ", the title one of his books successful and leased by the Catholic episcopate. I will limit myself to recall some facts written and docuмented among the most notorious.

In 1859, Jacques Cretineau-Joly (1803 - 1875) was edited, with a short congratulatory Pius IX, his book The Church Roman against the Revolution. This book is the result of extensive archival research requested from the author by the Supreme Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX themselves. Y are among other published docuмents Sale of High where was exposed to a draft of the clergy infiltration Catholic Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, aimed to win over to Headquarters Peter: "We must come (...) the triumph revolutionary idea of using of a Pope. ""What we must ask, what we must seek and expected, as the Jєωs await the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs. "for preach "a revolution in tiara and screed "spread your net (...) tend to them bottom of the vestries, seminars and convents. "

In 1904, Bishop Henry Delassus (1836 - 1921) published his book The Problem of At present, with the approval of Many bishops and even the Cardinal Secretary State of Pope Pius X, Merry del Val. In this book, the author took up the theme of Cretineau-Joly (Volume I, Chapters XXII-XXIV), defining the attempt infiltration to the See of Peter "Supreme attack "against the Church.

 In 1910, Father Emmanuel Barbier (1851-1925) published, with the encouragement six French archbishops or bishops, its Masonic infiltration in the Church. this are the years of the modernist heresy condemned by St. Pius X, and the Abbe Barbier reported among other passages of disturbing Book by Antoine Fogazzaro set the index in 1906, Il Santo [The Saint]. this Saint of the modernists, who bears the name of Benedict, proposes a general revolution of the Church from within. "We are a number of Catholics - is Giovanni Selva, character in the novel, speaking - in Italy and outside Italy, church and lay people who want to reform of the Church. We desire no rebellion operated by lawful authority. we wish reforms in religious education, reforms in the worship of reforms in discipline of the clergy, the reforms also in the supreme government of the Church. For this, we need to create a opinion that brings the legitimate authority to act according to our views, not least that in twenty years, in thirty years, in fifty years "(it took in 60 ...). Fogazzaro for this coterie should be secret, "a masonry Catholic "(3). Who feared the Pope not fishing for fish hidden and do not put to the pan, it was said that when the fishing would have come to the surface "of the laity important, priests, monks, Bishops, perhaps the Cardinals, "the fisherman, frightened, dropping to Wed hook and catch.

The situation was particularly difficult in France where, in 1905, the government of the Third Republic, closely controlled by the Freemasons, had declared the separation of church and the state and denounced the Concordat of 1801. it are few who know the grounds and During these measurements were provided by dismissal (1904) of Bishop Albert Leon Marie North (1844-1922) from his seat Bishop of Dijon, because he was suspected to be affiliated with the Freemasons, the point that his seminarians refused to receive Holy Orders of his hands.

 The death of St. Pius X and the World War effected a sea change not only in temporal society, but also in the Church. The decline of Catholic full, who held high the banner the fight against modernism and masonry, corresponded rebirth of neo-modernism, by definition, sneaky, in the areas of biblical, ecuмenical liturgical and social, from the year twenty. It was the same side masonry : A slow but steady progress of infiltration of the sect began also, through discussions and meetings between representatives the clergy (especially Jesuits) and representatives of the lodges, the dialogue will end January 25 1983, when the 'enactment' of the new Code of Canon Law by John Paul II, the removal of the excommunication of Freemasons under the gun of 2335 the old code. The literature on the "dialogue" with Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ are numerous, both on the 'Catholic' than on the Freemason, we content ourselves here include well-known works of Pauline Priest Rosario Esposito: The great concordanze tra Chiesa e Massoneria [Large matches between Church and Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ] (Nardini 1987) and Chiesa e Massoneria. A DNA comune [Church and Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. A common DNA] (Nardini 1999) where you will find abundant material and a rich bibliography on the subject; the warnings did not make failing not Moreover, since the time of the Council, in the writings example of Peter and Leon de Virion Poncins (4). I would only like to summarize things well known. The dialogue between some members of the Catholic clergy and dignitaries of the Masonic sect had already begun long before the Vatican II. Remember only the most cases known and important: in 1928, Father Gruber, Jesuit opened the dialogue with the dignitary Mason Ossian Lang, in the years thirty, the French Jesuit Berteloot with Grand Lodge of France (A. Lantoine), the Berteloot father brought into contact Nuncio Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli with Baron Yves Marsaudon which Mgr Roncalli told to stay in masonry, in 1952, Cardinal Innitzer, Archbishop of Vienna, receives Bernard Scheichelbauer, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Vienna. Vatican It operates in this area as a turning point decisive departure from the past. All First, it is useful to recall the relationship between the Jєωιѕн B'nai B'rith Lodge and John XXIII. Marx Jules Isaac, a member of B'nai B'rith, obtained a commitment of John XXIII to revise the Catholic position on its relationship to Judaism (cf. Sodalitium Nos 40 and 41). John XXIII gave to Cardinal Bea, at the head of the Secretariat for the union Christians (cf. Sodalitium No. 38) the relations with the powerful Jєωιѕн masonry, the conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate (October 28 1965) will be the result (initial) of this collaboration. Once the B'nai B'rith is regularly received at the Vatican (including Pope Benedict XVI-Ratzinger). In his seminars with the nuncio Roncalli, the "brother" Marsaudon requested the abolition of the discipline Church against cremation, the request was immediately answered by Paul VI in 1963. During the session conciliar the bishop of Cuernavaca, Mexico Sergio Mendez Arceo, asked for the change of ecclesiastical discipline on Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. "... Statements Dignitatis Humanae and Nostra Aetate, approved by the Second Vatican Council - written Roberto Fabiani, also a Freemason - had been developed by prelates who attended Masonic lodges. Yes, because the that in the temples of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ sit dignitaries of the Catholic Church was not at all or on a legend pamphlet to as many believed or hoped, but in response to the truth. And these prelates Masons, the most authoritative had the stature, the cultural and openness of Cardinal Franziskus König, archbishop of Vienna "(5) and character leading to the Council itself. The sixties and seventies saw the development climate in the post-conciliar numerous meetings between church dignitaries and Masons. The Father Esposito recalled the case of eleven cardinals : Cushing, Cooke, Cody, König (for which we speak of Masonic initiation in the Lodge Giustizia e Liberta of the East of Rome, in obedience to the Piazza del Gesù) (6), Etchegaray, Alfrink, Feltin, Marty, Krol, Brandao Videla and Lorscheider, for what the bishops are even more numerous, some of them (eg Pézeril, Joyce Pursley) spoke in Lodge, while Brandao Videla went up there celebrate the "Mass" and was gratified by the Lodge a high decoration! (Like the Cardinal Arns).

In the dialogue with the masonry distinguished some priests who, according Esposito, had easy access to Paul VI: such was the case of Father Riquet, SJ and Father Miano, a Salesian, a member the Secretariat for Non-believers, Secretariat directed precisely by Cardinal König.

The dialogue also leads to some decisions authorized official, though in some cases, the dual membership the Catholic Church and Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. The first docuмent on this issue is the decision of the Conference Scandinavian-Baltic Episcopal October 1966. In February 1968, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith itself, with headed by Cardinal Seper, who is on a survey of Catholic Bishops for a review of the discipline on masonry. The episcopal conferences thirteen are to respond, all substantially in favor of this revision also the requirements of the Code of Canon Law does are already observed at all, responds to Cardinal Seper Cardinal König who prepares response in collaboration with the executive officer of the Austrian Masonry Kurt Baresch (text and history in Esposito, Chiesa e massoneria. A DNA comune, pp. 204-218). The Secretariat non-believers, led by Cardinal König, then undertook a formal dialogue entrusted to the secretary, Father Vincenzo Miano, Salesian, and two experts such as Father Caprile SJ and Father Esposito ssp: the "Catholic-Masonic conversations Rome and Ariccia "held with the Masons Gamberini, and Ascarelli Comba, lasted from 1969 to 1977. Meanwhile the letter of July 19, 1974 Cardinal Seper, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in Cardinal Krol, president of the Conference North American Bishops, sanctioned openness and change, in fact, the Church law, assuming the dual membership to the Church and Masonry, although in certain circuмstances only. The letter "liberating" the cardinal Seper had repercussions in various Episcopal Conferences who applied it their respective countries: from that of England and Wales (1974), to that of Brazil (1975) and St. Domingo (1976). The culmination of this dialogue was the new Code of Canon Law (January 25, 1983), which "repeals" the excommunication prescribed by masons Clement XII in 1738 and renewed until then by all his successors. The scandal caused by the removal of excommunication, and already by meetings we have described previously however, provoked a reaction Partial 1980 (conference statement German Bishops against double belonging) that led to the intervention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (Cardinal Ratzinger) of 26 November 1983 in which it is said that if the excommunication is excluded entirely, the prohibition affiliation to the masonry remains in effect Freemasons and therefore can not not approach the Holy Table. That had happened in the meantime? We do be excluded that part of the turnaround of the Congregation of the Faith has influenced the scandal caused by the denunciations of the by many newspapers (such as the fortnightly If if antimodernist no no directed by Father Francesco Putti, and then L'Osservatore political, with its famous list Pecorelli, the name of its director and journalist Freemason - later murdered - and published in the number of the September 12, 1978); was denounced membership of the Freemasons many ecclesiastical renowned as the Cardinals Baggio, Pellegrino, Marchisano, Poletti and Villot (these belie the last two) and Bishop Bugnini, lead author of the liturgical reform, away from the Roman Curia after this scandal and sent to "exile" to the nunciature of Iran (7). The scandal of the Lodge Masonic P2 Licio Gelli was probably an even greater influence. At the P2 Lodge belonged indeed badges representatives of finance "Catholic" such as bankers and Calvi Sindona (both under investigation court, then tragically and mysteriously died) and a close friend and Lercaro collaborator, Umberto Ortolani, it is not up to the Institute for works of religion of the Vatican (IOR), and its president the Bishop Marcinkus who have been involved in any that in surveys of Italian judges (8). The vicissitudes of the P2 Lodge handed in forefront of the news issues related to the affiliation of Catholic prelates Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ: "thorny problem" in the words of the Father Esposito in Chapter X (The clergy a Freemason) of his work already mentioned, the great concordanze tra Chiesa e Massoneria [The close agreement between Church and Masonry]. According to Esposito, citing a wide bibliography, there would be docuмents proving the affiliation of certain cardinal (De Bernis, Delci (9), de Rohan, von Trautmansdorf- Vysberg Brancaforte and all the Eighteenth century) and fifty bishops or archbishops, nearly all dating at times distant now ... This does not exclude memberships closer to us, but the Father Esposito, expert and maçonnophile, prefers not to reveal. But the death Paul VI, the situation was such that the Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy, Giordano Gamberini (also also Vaud and "bishop" Gnostic) wrote Paul VI in the Rivista Massonica [Review Masonic] (July 1978): "for us is the death of the man who brought down the condemnation of Clement XII and its successors: in other words, the first time - in the history of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ modern - the head of the largest religion West died in a non hostile with the Freemasons. And for the first time in the history of the Freemasons can pay tribute to the burial of a Pope, without ambiguity or contradiction. " For Father Esposito, who answered Gamberini in the August issue of the journal Masonic "He" (Paul VI) "would enjoyed "the tribute of the Grand Master: "No action has never required much courage - the priest writes Pauline - that was to be the basis for the reform - the turnaround - reports between Catholic Church and Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. " Turnaround expected, it seems, of long: "The Father Felix A. dominicain Morlion, well known as founder of International University 'Pro Deo [the current LUISS, n.e.c.] and collateral, (...) Told me one day that he had spoken with GB Montini, Archbishop at the time, reports between Catholic Church and disastrous Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. Montini told him: 'A generation has passed away, peace is made between the two companies'. I already alluded to the episode, however, without giving the name of the Pontiff, in an article Vita Pastorale released in December 1974. Now that the Pontiff is died, there is no more reason to continue to keep the secret. And forecasting - I would say the decision - is fully verified, the encounter with Morlion owed not take place until 1948-1950, the letter of Holy Office to Cardinal Krol is dated July 19, 1974, then within one generation is fully respected. " Whatever we have said is intended to demonstrate how, in spite of about 3 500 papal docuмents of conviction of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ (number counted by Father Esposito), never, not even today, have missed the unfortunate ecclesiastical who, like Judas, betray Christ and the Church by joining in Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ or encouraging in some how the designs. What is more: after Vatican II we got to the point of power talk about a match between Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and Catholic Church, or better: between Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and the modernists infiltrated the Catholic Church. The Father Ferrer Benimeli example, citing the condemnation of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ desired by Leo XIII, as "it works tenaciously to cancel any society interference by the magisterium and the authority of the Church and to this end the broadcasts and claims separation of church and state "comments "Today the Vatican is fighting For the same separation between state and Church ... "(quoted in Esposito, Chiesa e massoneria ... p. 170). And Father Esposito luimême concludes, as it were, when writes: "October 27, 1986 John Paul II calls Sitting in the supreme heads of many religions. All pray for peace, each remains in its own religion and requests with its own formulas. The spirit of Assisi, had already expressed an infinite number times, albeit in language less 10 solemn and public, was then carried out Many others do not. This is exactly establish this spirit that Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ been established and codified it in the first days of its existence. Since then lodge itself in bring together people of all religions, which are forbidden to talk about about. In Assisi the hierarchies of all religions prayed and spoke not of religion, a theme which would have divided and opposed but of peace, and in houses, the brothers talk and pray for the same, or for development rights, development Overall, for the charity, Philanthropy. It's tolerance, not religious indifferentism or syncretism religious. There will be people thinking badly or shocked, but at least they realize account of being the party of Archbishop Lefebvre and not of the Council and Pope Wojtyla " (Ibid, pp. 12-13). If so, it is even need to join the Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, as the following of Neo-modernism becomes a named a brother "three dots". While this is not in the blink of an eye that has been achieved transform (more or less unnoticed) almost all the clergy and Lay Catholics in a Grand Lodge Masonic. It is therefore legitimate to assume that many were the infiltration the Masonic sect among the ranks of Catholic clergy, but this assumption is still far from being a demonstration of membership of the sect of Cardinal Rampolla or any other church ...

When an alleged Masonic affiliation is a legend and slander

A rumor or a written statement or the Masonic affiliation of a prelate, a priest, a bishop, a pope does enough, indeed, for this affiliation is certain, or even probable and not without foundation. History offers many examples of legends slanderous against the champions of Catholic cause, falsely accused of belonging to Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. One case The most famous is probably that of Pope Benedict XIV (Prospero Lambertini) which renewed the excommunication of Clement XII intervened against the masonry and to the King of Naples, Charles III, to prohibit and extirpate the sect's kingdom. Yet the hypocritical tributes Pontiff to Voltaire, Swedenborg and Walpole, and the rumors Lodge on the Roman collected by the theologian Mason earned Protestant Münster the Pope the humiliation of being suspected of being himself a Freemason, which led him, among others, to renew the excommunication against its detractors. But his zeal antimasonic no avail against the prejudice, yet since 1911 - as written Francovich - P. Duchaine avalalisait the false news of the initiation of Lambertini (10), and in 1961 Fr Lesaint the spread - As reported Coston - in Pax review (11). The legend about Pius IX also has a hard time. This great and holy Priest who condemned Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ in at least twenty-eight important docuмents was accused of being himself a mason, and slander continues to this day as the Dictionary of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ European published in 2005 puts the number of "brothers" of the Lodge of Eterna Catena East of Palermo in 1839 and is a confirmation of this in the fact that "the membership in Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ was revealed in the gallery of the National Assembly, Paris, by Charles Floquet F "(12). The source not cited, the dictionary is an article a certain Caubet published in December 1865 in the journal The World Masonic. The same Masonic World said in 1868 that Pius IX was initiated Philadelphia, United States in 1823. Damage Monsignor Mastai Ferretti never visited this country ... In 1878 another review Masonic Chain of Union, this altogether the testimony of an 'eyewitness' the sponsor in person of the initiation Master's, this time, would have occurred in 1811 in Thionville! In 1924, a Masonic journal French and in a printed book Rome repeat the slander. In a study dedicated to the issue (13), Yves Chiron wrote that "today does not endorse any mason more the thesis "and alleges the testimony a letter from the Librarian Grand Orient of France on May 30 1995, for against, ten years later in the Dictionary of the Grand Lodge on 'hearsay' reappear. Gossip, which by the way, hits too, but I do not know if it is with more funds, the Secretary of State 11 Pius IX, Cardinal Antonelli (1806-1876) which was even a "very devoted friend of St. Jean Bosco "and, of course," intimate "of Pius IX, which he was the faithful servant in his whole pontificate, until his death (cf. the Enciclopedia Cattolica) (14). The glorious figure of Cardinal Ottaviani was not more spared. The last secretary of the Holy Office, who, at the Council, opposed to all the new modernists, the who signed the brief critical review of Novus Missæ Ordo, was a Freemason, the least by innuendo, little credible the venerable P2 Lodge of the famous the Grand Orient of Italy, Licio Gelli (15). The docuмented facts (and Gelli admits) show rather the intimate friendship between the cardinal Lercaro representing peak Progressivism and the author of conciliar reform liturgy, and the right arm of Gelli, Umberto Ortolani, and this is how by against even the name of Ottaviani is saved! Should we give credence to the insinuations a Freemason, as the demon is the father of lies? In this Gelli (still alive) is worthy heir to the Rivista Italiana della Massoneria, which published in two parts, 1 August 1892 in June-July 1895, lists of church Masons. "The two lists are not charism of rigor "- writes Father Esposito. "The harm of the review - he says - is also does not control until certainty that certain statements or appear manifestly unfounded or not are not sufficiently shown in this sense we recall the statements unsustainable of the periodical (1895, 146) about Clement XIV, St. Anthony Mary Claret or Nocedal "(16). The great expert of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ (and an enemy of sect), Henri Coston, wrote thus in 1964, Rampolla talking about the case, after giving similar cases of Benedict XIV and Pius IX ("The charge by the Masonic Bishop against Rampolla reminiscent masons against Pius IX "p. 172): "Account Given what we have said, unless Except we do not know - we can not naturally take at face with the assertions of the author of 'Sons of Light [Roger Peyrefitte] - it seems unlikely that the priests of the Roman Catholic Church are francsmaçons " (17). In 1992 re Coston is more severe (in the meantime there was the Council): after Rampolla recalling the case and if the North, he concludes: "If we had a long reported cases Rampolla and the North is to show how difficult it is to prove membership Masonic dignitaries. (...) It Nevertheless, according to the adage famous, there is no smoke without fire, and that if it is difficult to prove membership senior prelates in Masonic secret societies, in the absence of authentic docuмents, can rightly be considered at least as allies objectives Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, since their behavior, or policy are accordance with the intention, referred to, to plans for back-row seat that they are well known "(18). I anticipate my conclusion, it is difficult to ignore the ruling Henri Coston and proclaim certain and demonstrated that himself admitted not to be yet demonstrated in the current things (19).

The Masonic initiation of Cardinal Rampolla

Current Status of the thesis

The first rumors of a any of the cardinal Masonic initiation Secretary of State to Leo XIII back - Then we will see better - to the year 1929, ie 15 years after the death of the prelate, and 26 years after the famous conclave in which the cardinal Puzyna put his veto on the election of Cardinal Rampolla. Since then, since 1929, therefore, the version "Rampolla mason", which is its distribution capillary to the many written and conferences of the Marquis of Franquerie in the 70's, has been enriched by new elements. I do this as is exposed in the book the church eclipsed? (Delacroix, 1997, second edition), work Group of Friends of Christ the King. "At the death of Leo XIII - reads in The Church eclipsed? at pp.. 72-73 of the second edition - the Freemasons believed that it was time to install one of the his family on the throne of St. Peter. 'The man hand 'was called Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro!

Secretary of State to Leo XIII, Cardinal Rampolla was a high initiate receiving he frequented the Lodges in the Luciferian instructions for implementation in the government of the Church. He founded the Vatican a back-room which was to recruit highest dignitaries of the Holy See.

During his holiday in Switzerland, Cardinal Rampolla went every Saturday in back-room near the abbey of Einsiedeln, and every two weeks to lodge Zurich to receive instructions of Power Occult disarm the Catholics of France their rallying to the Republic Masonic , And found a back-room inside of the Church, capable of providing high dignitaries of the Holy See, as the Cardinals Ferrata, Gasparri, Ceretti, Bea, etc..

This lodge was part of Zurich OTO, the Ordo Templi Orientis which Cardinal Rampolla was indeed a member. he was reached the highest ranks of the Luciferian cults since it was up to eighth and Ninth grades of O. T.O., only grades allowed to approach the Grand Master General National and Supreme Head of the Order, called 'Brother Superior' (Superior) or O.H.O. (Outer head of the order). It is interesting to note that the Ordo Templi Orientis was founded by Aleister Crowley, considered the greatest Satanist of modern times. (...) Bishop Jouin, founder and director of the Revue International Secret Societies (R.I.S.S.), having in hand the evidence of membership of Cardinal Rampolla, charged its editor, the Marquis of Franquerie, to go to the Cardinals and show Bishops of France.

Felix Lacointa, editor of 'The block anti-revolutionary '(ex-Catholic Bloc) testified on his side in 1929: 'In During our last interview (with Msgr. Marty, Bishop of Montauban), as held him aware of the recent discoveries and we had to speak of Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro, he wanted to say that during the ad limina visit he made to Rome, some time after the death of former Secretary of State to Leo XIII, he was called by a cardinal (Merry del Val, Secretary Crown of Saint Pius X) ... who told him with great detail at the death of Cardinal Rampolla, was discovered among his papers evidence formal of his treachery. These damning docuмents were brought to Pius X. The Holy Pontiff was appalled, but wanting to preserve the dishonor memory of the prelate and the felon To avoid a scandal, he said, deeply moved, 'The unhappy! Burn! 'And the papers were thrown into the fire in his presence "(VIREBEAU: prelates and Freemasons, Paris 1978, p. 28).

At the Conclave, Cardinal Rampolla concentrated on him by a majority vote, but Cardinal of the Austro-Hungarian Pusynas, intervened and declared that his government opposed the election of Rampolla. the Sacred College elected in his place the Cardinal Giuseppe Sarto took the name Pius X (note: The revelations about the episode of the cardinal Rampolla was taken from 'The Block Anti-revolutionary', No. June-July 1929: 'Brother Rampolla').

The Freemasons were therefore almost successful in the early twentieth century have 'their pope' at the head of the Church in the person Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro.

Once elected, St. Pius X, to counter enemy infiltration into the clergy, demanded of each anti-modernist oath, the priest at the time of his ordination. "

The quote of the Church overshadowed ends. In an anonymous article devoted to Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro of the "Encyclopedia free "virtual Wikipedia, were added the following information: "After his death, a French prelate, Monsignor Jouin, founder of the International Journal of secret societies, produced docuмents proving that he believes membership of fire Rampolla to Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. Moreover, the prelate was Grand Master of the Ordo Templi Orientalis (Sic) (OTO), an esoteric lodge. Monsignor Jouin also declared that he himself had begged Austria to use its right to exclusive to block the throne of Peter in a francmaçon ". The "Internet" was probably limited inspired by the recent book by Craig Heimbichner, Blood on the altar. The secret History of the World's Most Dangerous Secret Society [Blood on the altar. The Secret History the most dangerous secret society the world] (Emissary Publications, 2005). This book (which I have not read) book reviews were published in the press "traditionalist" fully supportive of the reviews , In The Salt of the Earth, for example, the theological journal of the Dominicans Avrillé (No. 56, Spring 2006, pp.. 190 - 196), and in the newsletter under the banner (No. 126, August 2006, pp. 4-11), in an article signed Felix entitled Causes and F Rampolla del Tindaro. An affiliate of the cardinal Cons-Luciferian Church. Both magazines are openly "Lefebvre," but the bulletin data published by Maria Virgo Father Marchiset trend sedevacantist- Lefebvre, fully taken up and approved Article of causes (Virgo Maria, 9 October 2006, www.virgo-maria.org). On traces of Heimbichner, case goes to state all Secretaries of State Pie IX to the present, were appointed by Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, and will even criticize including priests, St. Pius X, Benedict XV and Pius XII. These are serious allegations slanderous to the Church and legitimate pontiffs that led me to write This article doubting the fidelity of a prelate, even a cardinal, is one thing; anything else is to blame the Church ellemême as does almost Article Under the banner of, exceeding all bounds of decency. It is therefore essential dear readers, we'll see what are the arguments for the thesis which the cardinal was affiliated with Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, and what are the arguments a Conversely, to conclude then by a severe conviction of a certain spirit of defamation and denigration of any infiltrates the Church, unfortunately, among some "Traditionalists" messy and the good name the true defenders of the Catholic faith full against the errors of modernism.

So we start our "trial" pointing out that already in his lifetime, Cardinal Rampolla was never found by courts of the Church (the only appropriate, by the way in looks) for this alleged Masonic affiliation ; It would have been the duty of anyone who had suspicions on the matter, to denounce to the competent ecclesiastical (can. 2336 § 2) for violation of canon 2335 which prohibits on pain of excommunication enrollment in Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ with, for the clergy, the penalty of suspension and deprivation of any profit, office, dignity pension and ecclesiastical (Can. 2336 § 1). In the absence of an ecclesiastical trial, and in total ignorance of Judgement God is with the arguments the historian, that are and will always docuмents and these alone, we try to get closer to the truth.

First argument: the veto of the Emperor against Cardinal Rampolla during conclave of 1903

Speech to the charge. "It should be remember that Cardinal Rampolla was virtually elected, but that the Emperor of Austria, knowing probably belonging back-row seat to the Secretary of State Leo XIII, vetoed. This veto any angel prevented a tool of Lucifer ascend the papal throne and had to beneficial results to raise a Saint "(MARQUIS OF FRANQUERIE, Saint Pius X, savior of the Church and of France, ed. Résiac, 1976 3). "C. Heimbichner tells us that it was Monseigneur Jouin decided that the Emperor of Austria to use its veto power to neutralize Rampolla when it was almost assumed that the Freemason O and the Satanist. T.O. would be elected pope. Monseigneur Jouin, who had foreseen the turn that would take the conclave, persuaded then the Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria- Hungary to invoke the 'right of exclusion' back to the seventeenth century, clause a long-forgotten treaty between Vienna and the Vatican. Treaty which gave Francois-Joseph veto power on the election of a pope. Thus, it was thanks to Monseigneur Jouin, the venerable prelate well aware of the machinations of secret societies that Rampolla was sidelined "(Felix Causes, in Under the Banner, cit., Pp.. 8 - 9). "The Freemasons were therefore almost successful in the early twentieth century have 'their pope' at the head of the Church in the person of Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro "(Friends of Christ the King The Church eclipsed, Delacroix, 1997 73).

Speech to the charge. "It should be remember that Cardinal Rampolla was virtually elected, but that the Emperor of Austria, knowing probably belonging back-row seat to the Secretary of State Leo XIII, vetoed. This veto any angel prevented a tool of Lucifer ascend the papal throne and had to beneficial results to raise a Saint "(MARQUIS OF FRANQUERIE, Saint Pius X, savior of the Church and of France, ed. Résiac, 1976 3). "C. Heimbichner tells us that it was Monseigneur Jouin decided that the Emperor of Austria to use its veto power to neutralize Rampolla when it was almost assumed that the Freemason O and the Satanist. T.O. would be elected pope. Monseigneur Jouin, who had foreseen the turn that would take the conclave, persuaded then the Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria- Hungary to invoke the 'right of exclusion' back to the seventeenth century, clause a long-forgotten treaty between Vienna and the Vatican. Treaty which gave Francois-Joseph veto power on the election of a pope. Thus, it was thanks to Monseigneur Jouin, the venerable prelate well aware of the machinations of secret societies that Rampolla was sidelined "(Felix Causes, in Under the Banner, cit., Pp.. 8 - 9). "The Freemasons were therefore almost successful in the early twentieth century have 'their pope' at the head of the Church in the person of Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro "(Friends of Christ the King The Church eclipsed, Delacroix, 1997 73).

I call the defense. This is the argument most prevalent in the public favor of the Masonic affiliation of Rampolla, but this is not the oldest (Felix Lacointa, it seems, does not refer) nor the most merit. Yet it is the only whose absolute falsity can be demonstrated. Let's start with some justice to This information is absolutely false thesis. On 31 July following the death of Leo XIII occurred July 20, 1903, the 62 cardinals present in Rome met in conclave to elect his successor. After six votes, Aug. 4, was elected the cardinal Joseph Sarto, Patriarch of Venice, which was become the great Saint Pius X. From the first ballot (August 1) was designed immediately the different trends the Sacred College. Cardinal Rampolla, supported by the unanimous vote of the Cardinals French and Spanish (in harmony and under sponsored by their governments respectively) obtained 24 votes, Cardinal Gotti, preferring instead to government of the Central Powers (Austria and Germany But Snider, p. 24, denies such support) obtained in 17, 21 votes were still divided among other candidates, including five for Cardinal Sarto which will then be elected, a quorum two thirds of the votes was set at 42. When the morning of August 2, 1903, at the beginning the third ballot, Cardinal of Puzyna Kozielsko (1842-1911), prince bishop of Krakow, told the name of "Her Majesty Apostolic Emperor, King of Hungary " the exclusive against Cardinal Rampolla, the latter had obtained the second ballot only 29 votes, a figure that rose to 30 and it held there (without ever climb above) after the intervention of Cardinal Polish therefore far from the 42 votes needed for the election. The thesis that it was the veto of Austria, which prevented Rampolla's election is historic unfounded: it is not the veto which made possible the election (the Cardinals protested, formally the same (20) inadmissible against the interference power Secular conclave on) but the fact Rampolla that simply did not and that from the beginning, the votes needed to be elected. At worst, the imperial veto was risky Paradoxically, to achieve the effect contrary! (21). Second, it is impossible Monsignor Jouin has decided to use the Emperor (or rather misuse) of its "Right" of veto against Cardinal Rampolla, depending on the version of Wikipedia and causes, following Heimbichner. Indeed, not only it is unlikely that the Emperor Franz Joseph allowed himself to be to convince a not so serious a simple priest, who is more of a foreign nation, as was Monsignor Jouin, but especially because in 1903, took place when the facts, Mgr Jouin not concerned the least World Masonic issues. It is precisely Editions Saint-Remi, close associations CSI (Catholic semper idem) and Friends of Christ the King who had the merit to republish the life of Bishop Jouin (1844-1932) written by Canon Sauvêtre. Only at the age of 65 that he who founded the R.I.S.S. (Journal International Secret Societies) and the directed until his death, became interested Masonic conspiracy, following a meeting with former Secretary of the Grand East of the rue Cadet, Jean-Baptiste Bidegain (1870-1926) (22), who - in the part of the case sheets - was originally the fall of the Combes Ministry. The meeting with BSA was in 1909 (23); the R.I.S.S. was founded in 1912 ... Too late to interfere in the Conclave of 1903!

In the eyes of the historian, the Catholic zeal and anti-Masonic attributed to the Emperor Franz Joseph is equally implausible. This not only because some of his illustrious predecessors played an important role in Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ (We think of Francis, Duke of Lorraine and husband of the Empress Maria Theresa) or in its favor (Joseph II and Leopold II, it may mason), but also because Franz Joseph was far, unfortunately, to embody the ideal of the Christian prince (the Catholics were full of hope rather turned toward the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, his heir, who was, coincidentally, murdered by the Cult in Sarajevo, and had with the Emperor of very poor reports) (24). The ecclesiastical policy of Franz Joseph was, in fact, positive between 1850 and 1855 (date of composition concluded with the Holy See) eliminated when Joseph of the legislation Austria, but after the fall of 1866, especially under the government the Protestant Beust, Austria promulgated a series of laws anticatho- 15 alcoholics that led to the termination unilateral arrangement, July 30, 1870, and this aversion to the proclamation of dogma of papal infallibility. This is as well as volunteers from around the world flocked to defend Rome and the Pope, the Austrian government did not lift not a finger to defend Pius IX, but even threatened to schism. With the "Triple Alliance" of Austria-Hungary bind a military alliance with Germany and Italy, two powers that precisely these years was strongly opposed to the Papacy, diplomatically isolating the Holy See. As for the "ʝʊdɛօ-Masonry" (To use an expression dear to Monsignor Jouin), François-Joseph consistently opposed the anti-Jєωιѕн policy of the mayor Vienna, the Social Christian Karl Lueger, and the Austrian Government does no special support in Congress anti-Mason 1896, held yet Trento, while Imperial Earth (25). By against, in the brief period from 1896 to 1898, the Secretary of State (ie Rampolla) 41 docuмents issued against the "evil cult" of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ! (26).

Monsignor Jouin could then talk to Franz Joseph Rampolla's Masonic, and Francis Joseph had no reason to Rampolla to prevent this ground ... But there are arguments against the version of the charge even stronger. If the Cardinal Puzyna had made the slightest allusion to while the Sacred College, or even just a cardinal, the fact that Rampolla would was a mason, how to explain the indignation of all the cardinals to the intervention Austria, seen as a serious violation freedom of the Church? How to explain yet he obtained a large number voice to the last election? how explain the fact that among the voters more convinced of Rampolla was a Cardinal, who, under the pontificate of St. Pius X was one of the most ardent supporters of the politics of anti-modernist Pope, Cardinal Vives y Tuto (27)? How to explain that Cardinal Sarto itself is likely always voted at all elections, for Cardinal Rampolla (28)? In addition: how to explain the reaction of the same Cardinal Sarto, now Pius X, which, among the first acts after his election, did not impose (in the words involved), the oath antimodernist from 1910 and has nothing to do with the case Rampolla, but solemnly condemned by the veto against of exclusive? For some months after the conclave, January 20, 1904, St. Pius X promulgated the Apostolic Constitution Commissum nobis which I transcribe here in full:

"The task of governing the whole Church, as has been established by God, we urge severely we apply our forces that, following the intervention of a foreign power, it is brought in any manner prejudicial to the freedom that Christ He was licensed as a common heritage, and that so many heralds of the Gospel, so very holy priests, so many illustrious of our Predecessors defended the speech, writings, and by the shedding of their blood. Requested by their example and authority, hardly amounted to the Chair of Peter, yet unworthy, we believe it is Our first duty to Apostolic ensure that the life of the Church can be expressed in a totally free, is rejected external interference, whether such that wanted the divine Founder, and that requires absolutely supreme mission. Now if in the life of the Church it is a situation that requires the highest degree of freedom, it is undoubtedly that which relates to the election of the Roman Pontiff, in that 'When it comes to deciding on the head, it does is not just a party, but whole body '(Gregory XV, Æterna Patris) ... In this full freedom in the election specifically opposes the Supreme Pastor the veto policy, expressed more than once by the heads of various government nations, and by which we try to steer someone access to the Sovereign Pontificate. If it happened sometimes, it was never approved by the Apostolic See. On the contrary, to consider what they instituted about future conclaves, it is with conviction and zeal unusual that the Roman Pontiffs tried to push the intervention of any outside power Sacred to the Assembly of Cardinals convened to elect the Pope. This is what attested by the Constitutions 'In eligendis' Pius IV; Æterna Patris' of Gregory XV; 'Apostolatus officium' of Clement XII, and particularly 'In hac subliminal', 'per Licet Apostolica 'and' Consultar 'of Pius IX. In truth, as taught by the experience, provisions established to date to prevent political veto or exclusion failed to meet expectations and, the change of circuмstances time, this appeared to our intromission time even more unfounded of reason and fairness. Therefore, under the apostolic office, which we is entrusted, following in the footsteps of our predecessors, After careful consideration, with science and some of our own making, we condemn the radical political veto ie the Exclusive (as it is called) even as a simple desire and any intervention and mediation, and We establish that it is lawful to anyone not even the heads of state, to intervene or intervene in any circuмstances either in the formal operation of electing the Roman Pontiff. Therefore, the name of holy obedience, under threat of divine judgment and under pain of excommunication latae sententiae reserved so Special to the future Pontiff, We prohibit the cardinals of the Holy Roman Church to each and every particular, and all other participants in the conclave, to accept the office under any circuмstances, to from all political power whatever it or, to make known the veto said Exclusive even as a simple desire, and reveal the veto which he knew to any reason as to all Cardinals met in college, at each Cardinal in particular, and this both in writing that word of mouth, both directly and closely indirectly and through others. We want this ban to be extended in all mediations, intercessions cited and all other terms by which the powers of all ranks and lay all kinds will want to interfere in the election of the Pontiff. Finally we urge strongly the cardinals of the Holy Church Roman with the words of Our Predecessors : In the election of the Pontiff, 'Absolutely careless intercessions and other considerations of secular Princes (Pius IV, In eligendis, Clement XII, Apostolatus officium) with only for the glory of God and the good of the Church, they express their vote in favor of one more the other, they consider, in the Lord, suitable to govern successfully and advantageously the universal Church. We also want our letter, at the same with other Constitutions on the same subject, or read in the presence of all the first regular congregation who held after the death of the Pontiff, again after the entry into conclave and similarly, if someone is elected to the honor of the purple After the oath to keep strictly standards imposed by this Constitution. This, against whoever is otherwise, even if it is invested dignity of a special or very special. It is therefore permissible for anyone to violate or by a reckless boldness to contradict This page of our prohibition, order, declaration, link, will, admonition, exhortation, command. And if someone would oppose it, he knows that it incurs the indignation of Almighty God and His holy Apostles Peter and Paul. Done at Rome, St. Peter, on January 20th of the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1904, the first year of Our Pontificate "(29).

After reading a similar docuмent, how can we in the least hypothesize that Franz Joseph and Cardinal Puzyna acted in the interest of the Church?

And how can you offend Monsignor Jouin as to give it a complicity with an open violation of the rights and freedom of the Church?

Objection to the charge. So how explain the intervention of Cardinal Puzyna, and the veto of Austria Exclusive against Cardinal Rampolla? intervention as serious is justified does not only in the case of a very revealing important, such as that of the affiliation of Rampolla to the Freemasons?

Response of the defense. We have already seen - with the words of Saint Pius X - that the veto was an abuse of exclusive and non- the result of a treaty (which never existed) between the Holy See and Austria. Current abuse however, nothing less than exceptional, and always due to political reasons. Let's look at some examples in history (30). Cardinal Carafa Gianpietro received three times exclusive of Charles V, Emperor, but in the third it was no longer required account and he was elected as the Paul IV (1555). Cardinal Aldobrandini received three times the exclusive of Spain, and fourth conclave he became Pope Clement VIII (1592). Cardinal Pamphili was the exclusive King Louis XIV of France, and however, became Pope Innocent X (1644). Cardinal Chigi had the exclusive France in the conclave of 1665 (two Cardinals were eliminated at this conclave, by a Spain and the other by France), and was elected as Pope under the name of Alexander VII. In other cases, the exclusive effectively prevented the election of a Cardinal: Cardinal Paolucci was expelled from France, and that Innocent XIII was elected; Cardinal Cavalchini was expelled from France, and that Clement XIII was elected; Cardinal Bellisomi was ruled by Austria, and that Pius VII was elected, the cardinal was excluded by Severoli Austria, and that Leo XII was elected, the Cardinal Giustiniani was ruled by Spain, and that Gregory XVI was elected, the cardinal gαysruck who brought the veto of Austria the election of Cardinal Mastai arrived no time was had in the conclave and Pie IX ... As seen, the veto of exclusive was an abuse, it's true, but unfortunately involved almost every conclave, and certainly not excluded because the smell was Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ. The case of Cardinal Rampolla does seems no different from that of so many illustrious excluded predecessors before him for purely political reasons.

Indeed, the reason for the exclusion of Rampolla is clearly to be found in political orientation that as Secretary State of Leo XIII, he gave the Vatican diplomacy. The intransigence Leo XIII and Cardinal Rampolla on the Roman question (intransigence just increased with the accession Rampolla of the Secretariat of State in 1887 and his dissension with man State - Mason - Crispi) opposed the Holy See to the Italian Government Rome had usurped the state of the Church. The Triple Alliance formed in 1882 between Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary, isolated the Vatican, which tended necessarily to support the dual alliance between France and Russia. Hence, among other things, the attempt (Failed) to an accommodation with the French government (the famous Rally the Republic of 1890) and reports with Austria in difficult areas of Russian influence as Poland (Shared at the time between Russia, Austria and Germany) and the Balkans (31). Émile Poulat sees the cause of the veto in the complex issues of Poland (and the Cardinal Puzyna was indeed Polish): "It is now recognized that during the conclave was elected as Pius X, to the veto Rampolla by the Emperor of Austria came from Polish bishops (see Bishop Walerian Meysztowicz, they actually glory, Poland in Christendom, Paris, New Edition Latina, 1966, pp. 136-139) ... "; nationalism mystical tendencies of Poles not support the policy of the Holy See vis-à-vis Russia and leaned, against Empire of the Czar, on Austria (32). Some said that in reality, with the veto, Austria intended to serve Germany (That's what the Cardinal thought Mathieu) or rather to Italy, who feared uncompromising policy of the old Secretary State (33), but Benedict XV, who was as a spiritual son of Rampolla, told Filippo Crispolti that the veto was in otherwise a "scheming Austrian"; "He said explicitly that [Austria] criticized Cardinal [Rampolla] have too excited slave mind (...). She reproached him also do not have immediate Agliardi nuncio recalled the words after that he would say in Budapest (...). But since Revertera, Ambassador to the Holy See, to bring the black society [papal] and white [philoitalienne] and with its proverbial lack of tact, made sure that a surprise is found together to Cardinal Rampolla table and the English ambassador near the Quirinal (34), what rightly complained the Cardinal Revertera an Austrian food spirit of spite against him ... "(35). Docuмents French diplomatic confirm the words of Benedict XV Crispolti, about the support of Cardinal Rampolla aspirations to independence of Slavic Catholics (36) Croatian and Slovenian. Even Adrian Loubier (Bonnet City), who believes strongly in yet Masonic Rampolla (p. 93), the question slave is the real cause of the Austrian veto against him (37). In short, if different (And convergent) may have been the reasons the veto against Rampolla, they seem to have was all a political and a presumed Membership in the masonry of the cardinal as reason for the veto is against ruled out, given what is written above.  

Last argument of the defense. A final argument confirms St. Pius X gave the Cardinal Rampolla as President of the Commission Pontifical Biblical (the cardinal resigned the charge in 1908) after which, 1908 Specifically, the cardinal was appointed Secretary of the Holy Office, Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Bishops, he was also appointed to other charges Curie (In 1910), it is inconceivable that St. Pius X has been appointed to such offices of the Roman Curia a prelate known francmaçon.

Second and third arguments: the evidence a priest and a French bishop, Interview by Felix Lacointa

The charge. First present the witness charges against him. This is Felix Lacointa. Born in Toulouse in 1870, Lacointa was a courageous Catholic journalist full (38), friend of the priest Emmanuel Barber, director of The critique of liberalism, which received praise from St. Pius X and well deserved encouragement. From 1902 to 1927, led the Bloc Lacointa Catholic who in 1927 took (had to take, we will see why) the name of anti-revolutionary block. It is precisely this journal who published in 1929, the news is the second and third counts against Cardinal Rampolla. In the February issue reports a Lacointa meeting he had with the Bishop of Montauban, Bishop Marty. On this occasion, the French prelate said, "during the visit 'ad Cardinal January Puzyna limina 'he made to Rome, some time after the death of former Secretary of State Leo XIII, he was called by a cardinal - he still lives, we will not name, to him avoid trouble - who told him with great detail at the death of Cardinal Rampolla, was discovered among his papers evidence formal of his treachery. These docuмents damning were brought to Pius X, the holy Pontiff was appalled, but wanting to preserve dishonor the memory of the prelate and felon in order to avoid a scandal, he said very moved: "The wretch! Burn! ... 'And papers were thrown into the fire in his presence " (39). In the June-July this same journal, publishes a new Lacointa testimony of a French priest this time he does not give the name. The priest question had written to tell him Lacointa a visit he made in 1907 to Abbey of Einsiedeln, with thirty other French priests. Cardinal [Rampolla] was on vacation for two months Einsiedeln, and the priests asked be received. "We spoke of the heroism sublime French priests victims, them, the separation [of church and state] pretend We say that had he not been dismissed the Chair of St. Peter, we would not fallen into this terrible situation, due Pius X. Finally, hit by an air of great Lord, I wanted to write a brochure all the details of the visit. I asked a Catholic bookseller whether it would be possible to obtain a brochure for this short preface to the Eminent cardinal. What was my surprise to hear bookseller told me point blank: "Needless ! It is not worth the trouble. Every two days, he goes to the lodge of Zurich! 'I put this joke of a grievance on behalf of a bookseller and I left my draft brochure. This word I just returned from the rumor of the Cardinal in various organs and I give it for what it is. F.A. priest "(40).

The defense. At first glance, the two evidence is impressive. Are they equally decisive? We will see the Following what to think of the authority of Felix Lacointa in this area, Lacointa is basically the only direct source of these two stories (we do not know if, for example, Bishop Marty has never publicly confirmed what he Lacointa Attri- 19 Drunk). But it is precisely not direct testimony, but relato: are reported the things said by others, and this, many years after the fact (Articles are 1929, events occurred in 1907 and a date after the death of Rampolla in 1913). The testimony of anonymous priest has certainly not valuable since we know nothing about the mysterious bookseller in question. More serious is the story "from the Vatican," which dates back a cardinal [Lacointa anonymous, Merry del Val for the Franquerie, Merry del Val which was precisely consecrated bishop by Rampolla], through the testimony of a bishop. But see, from the words of a Pope, how easy it is being distorted as confidences, and that in all environments including the Vatican. During World War I, Benedict XV agreed to be interviewed by a journalist French, a Latapie of the daily Liberty. It emerged from the interview (Actually granted) that the Pope have made statements that, especially in an atmosphere of war, appeared extremely serious, as pro- powers of the Central Powers (Austria and Germany). The scandal in France and also was enormous. Benedict XV, July 11 1915, then wrote to Cardinal Amette, Archbishop of Paris, on June 25, was reported Pope in the "painful emotion "caused in France by the interview to Freedom, "You know that we refuse any authority to Mr. Latapie who has reproduced in his article, nor our thoughts, nor Our word and wanted to publish it without review or approval of Our hand, despite the promise he had made. However, he certainly could not escape Our thought your insight that true should be taken from public docuмents and official the Apostolic See, not stories or relations private interviews with us, the political passion or prejudice individual often interpret the words heard that, then passing from mouth to mouth, are fantastic proportions " (41). The Marquis Crispolti, a close friend Benedict XV and was received in audience immediately after the journalist Latapie, said that in highlighting some confidences, and by omitting details that changed the meaning of what was says (42), the Pope's words could be distorted even in good faith. The confidences reached the Vatican journalist Lacointa not directly but indirectly, can not they have been distorted as were the words addressed directly by the reporter Benedict XV Latapie? (See Appendix).

From what has been said confirmation is given by the confidential docuмent written with the approach of the conclave by Archbishop Umberto Benigni, founder of Sodalitium Pianum, association so often anti-modernist blessed by St. Pius X, conclave which elected precisely Benedict XV in 1914. Mgr Benigni y drew up a list of all the cardinals who have able to take part in the conclave (Health of Saint Pius X was declining when the list was drawn August 27, 1913) and gave each a trial, without mincing words, all much in the style Benigni. Happened to Cardinal Rampolla, who obviously enjoyed no sympathy from our lord, it wrote: "superior man, mind full illusions, dreamy, the Jules Verne Policy Church, the Crispi government Papal megalomaniac "(43). It was certainly no compliments! Yet Bishop Benigni considered likely election of Rampolla, who died in cons in December next before St. Pius X. But not a word on a Masonic affiliation ... And the Cardinal Archbishop Benigni, enemy expert on Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, had worked well in the Secretariat of State, he knew the secrets of the Curia and had to available, as is well known, a structure of "espionage" internal enemies (modernist Christian Democrats) and external (Jєωs, Freemasons, Communists) of the Church. If really there was I do not say certainty but only the sound of betrayal, would he not have known? Especially that in the same list, he is not afraid to put next to the name of Cardinal Agliardi the fateful "three points" followed by a period question mark, a sign of suspicion of affiliation Masonic for the cardinal who was actually a large and influential patron modernists (44). Mgr Benigni suspected So Agliardi not Rampolla, not ever Moreover, after the death of Rampolla, he alluded the episode narrated by Lacointa or similar facts ... and Mgr Benigni was 20 certainly not the type to hide or burn docuмents that have demonstrated the affiliation Masonic of a prelate or even a cardinal (the more so if the cardinal in question was revered as a master those decreed by the end of his Sodalitium Pianum other words, Benedict XV and Cardinal Gasparri)!

Fourth argument: the journal The Equinox demonstrate that Rampolla was part of the Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.) Mage Aleister Crowley (the "Great Beast 666")

The charge. The accusation was published initially by two anti-Masonic journals : The Free Speech (1 July 1929) (45) and block anti-revolutionary (June-July 1929) (I do not know exactly which the two journals were given priority over the other, although as we have seen, the block had already begun his campaign with the first article in February 1929). Both publications refer to a magazine The Equinox, the official organ of the Ordo Templi Orientis, published at the time to U.S., Detroit (46). Number March 1919 (came into the hands of the editors the two anti-Masonic journals French only ten years later, thus 1929), published on page 199 a list "including the principal members who have shown most recently ". This list, which " part of the official manifesto of the O. T.O. signed by L. Bathurst IX, Grand Secretary General " includes 14 names, including that the "Cardinal Rampolla." "Our charge - Concludes Lacointa Felix, director of the Block anti-revolutionary - is justified: the Secretary of State to Leo XIII was a member one of the highest known lodges. " "As framed by the testimony of the great Pius X and that of the humble pilgrims in Einsiedeln, the name found in the directory The Equinox is a decisive proof: I have the right to assert that the Secretary State of Leo XIII belonged to a well of the highest lodges of the sect "(47). In a later article Bloc anti-revolutionary (1931) entitled The F Rampolla (Continued), Felix Lacointa meet first objections Articles against Cardinal Rampolla, speaks of role in O. T.O. Aleister Crowley "the well-known leader of the Masons worshipers Satan "(p. 38) and states that the list of which put the names of Cardinal Rampolla among affiliates O. T.O. the most illustrious, was a list of "names of affiliated deaths in the five years between a volume of the succeeding "(p. 40). The accurate and detailed references to the volume of O. T.O. given by the two journals anti-Masonic, if the reserved character secret of the magazine The Equinox, the statement Categorical Manifesto of the Order of 1917 published by The Equinox in 1919, Rampolla was shown that not only Freemason bu