“Gott mit uns”?

The first work quoted below was published whilst the First World War was still raging:

‘Houston Chamberlain, one of the best known of [the popular German writers, has written] . . . a ponderous compilation entitled Die Grundlagen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts [The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century], for which he is said to have been paid a large sum out of the privy purse by his appreciative Emperor. This work gratifies German pride beyond all measure, and has therefore been very successful, though as a matter of fact, the author's views are not at all original. In a fawning way he reiterates the statements that Germany is the foremost of nations, and bitterly regrets that in former invasions:

“The Teuton has not exterminated his enemies root and branch wherever he has stretched out his conquering arm . . .”

‘The traditional methods for organizing conquest are [seen as being] rather slow, and so an ingenious professor by the name of Vierordt has written an article for the Badische Landeszeitung [‘Baden State Newspaper’] to show the urgent necessity of killing off Germany's enemies by the million in order that conquered territories may be transformed into deserts, to be populated subsequently by virtuous Germans.

‘These publications give most interesting indications with regard to the mentality of their authors, who long for a far more complete destruction of Europe that that which took place in Attila's day. [And who] would no doubt organize the unravished portions of the Continent into immense factories, where the unsparing lash of the Prussian corporal would keep millions of serfs toiling to enrich the Germans in general and the professors in particular.’

(From: The Psychology of the Great War, by Gustave Le Bon, translated by E. Andrews; published New York, The Macmillan Company, 1916. pp. 164, 166).

In a chapter on ‘Kaiser Wilhelm II and German anti-semitism’ in one of his works on the Kaiser, John Röhl clarifies the different levels of anti-semitism suffered by the Jews in Germany between unification in 1871 and the Götterdämmerung of 1945. He classifies them as ranging from the first (lower) form being: ‘the anti-semitism of the salon, consisting of personal prejudice and collective but still informal discrimination’; and finally at the other extreme (number five): ‘there is the ultimate horror, the anti-semitism of extermination, the anti-semitism of the holocaust.’

And he then goes on to write that: ‘In examining the anti-semitism of Kaiser Wilhelm II, we shall need to be mindful of these five different types of anti-semitism. The baneful truth, however, is that at one time or another in the course of his long life he subscribed to all five.’

Röhl writes that after his abdication and flight to exile in Holland the Kaiser wrote the following to General August von Mackensen on 2 December 1919:

“The deepest, most disgusting shame ever perpetrated by a people in history, the Germans have done onto themselves. Egged on and misled by the tribe of Juda whom they hated, who were guests among them! That was their thanks! Let no German ever forget this, nor rest until these parasites have been destroyed and exterminated [vertilgt und ausgerottet] from German Soil! This poisonous mushroom on the German oak-tree!”

Röhl then goes on:

‘He [the Kaiser] called for a ‘regular international all-worlds pogrom à la Russe’ as ‘the best cure’. ‘Jews and Mosquitoes’ were ‘a nuisance that humanity must get rid of in some way or other’, he proclaimed, and added, again in his own hand: ‘I believe the best would be gas!’ [From notes: ‘Kaiser Wilhelm II to Poultney Bigelow, 15 August 1929. Bigelow Papers, New York Public Library. Two years earlier, Wilhelm had instructed a member of his entourage to ask Fritz Haber whether the Totalvergasung [‘Total Gasification’] of large cities had become a practicable possibility. Wilhelm von Dommes to Fritz Haber, 14 June 1927, Gutssche, Ein Kaiser im Exil, p. 92.’]

(From: The Kaiser and His Court: Wilhelm II and the Government of Germany, by John C. G. Röhl, Cambridge University Press, 1994 [originally published in Germany as Kaiser, Hof und Staat: Wilhelm II. Und die deutsche Politik by Verlag C. H. Beck, Munich 1987]; p. 194-195, p. 210, and notes p. 266).

In line with extremist Germanic thought of the time the Kaiser didn’t envision genocide as being solely reserved and warranted by the Jews as Röhl writes:

‘In September 1914, after the German victory at Tannenberg, the Kaiser proposed that the 90,000 Russian prisoners of war be driven onto a barren spit of land in the Baltic and kept there till they died of thirst and hunger: it was left to one of his generals to point out that that would be ‘genocide’.’ [From notes: ‘Admiral Georg Alexander von Müller, diary entry for 4 September 1914, BA-MA Freiburg. This entry was omitted in Walter Görlitz (ed.), Regierte der Kaiser? Kreigstagebücher, Aufzeichnungen und Briefe des Chefs des Marine-Kabinetts Admiral Georg Alexander von Müller 1914-1918 (Göttingen 1959), pp. 54f.’] (ibid. p. 207, and notes p. 229)

The following is from a late eighteenth-century work first published in 1796:

'Thus the wars, in which the tyrants of the European world are to be subdued, with their widely scattered partisans, being of such mighty influence in deciding the condition of the human race, are foretold, in several parts of the apocalypse, and under different emblems. Such appears to be the import of THE HARVEST and THE VINTAGE, described in the xivth chapter [of the Revelation].’

According to this prophetic interpretation the subduing of these ‘tyrants of the European world’ (also being ‘the enemies of the church and the adversaries of [God’s] people’) would consist of:

‘two most signal slaughters, between which some space of time would intervene, which agreeably to analogy may be represented by the interval, which separates a harvest from a vintage.’

During the second of these ‘two most signal slaughters’ the grapes are described not just as being solely ‘ripe’ but as now being ‘fully ripe’. To continue from the quoted work:

‘The symbolic grapes are described as fully ripe “That is,” says Vitringa, “the period of the divine forbearance had expired, and villanies, no longer to be tolerated, had arisen to their utmost height. The measure of crimes was filled up. — Punishment therefore could no longer be deferred, but the destroyers of the earth were at length to be destroyed, and were in their turn to meet with their reward.” ’

(From: Illustrations of Prophecy, by the Rev Joseph Towers; published London, MDCCXCVI [1796]*. pp. 298, 300).

*For lengthier quotes from this work by the Rev Joseph Towers see the World War Armageddon blog posts ‘The two world wars; & the “Harvest of the earth”, from April 2010; and ‘The best laid schemes of FROGS and men . . .’ from March 2010.

Armageddon – the valley of “excision”

(Above: A WWI German machine-gun crew. From a footnote to the work cited below: 'Joel iii. 14. . . . a threshing instrument, formed with revolving cylinders, armed with sharp pieces of iron. See Jahn Archæol. Bibl. § 64.')

From Canon (later Bishop) Wordsworth's Lectures on the Apocalypse (1849):

'What is meant by Armageddon?

'St. John refers us to the Hebrew tongue, and there the word Har signifies a Mountain; and it is rightly affirmed that Armageddon is a word formed by St. John to signify a defeat and slaughter, such as that of the Kings of Canaan at Megiddo, in the region of Galilee, wrought by a miraculous interposition of Almighty God, discomfiting the vast and terrible army of Sisera and his confederate Princes. . . . (pp. 447).

'It must also be observed, that King Josiah was defeated and mortally wounded at Megiddo [2 Chron. xxxv. 20.]; and though Josiah was a pious King, yet it must be remembered that, when at Megiddo, he was disobeying a divine command, given him by the Prophet Jeremiah. He was endeavouring to repel Pharaoh-Necho, who was marching towards the river Euphrates, to besiege Babylon . . .

'Thus Megiddo, or Mageddo, was a name, made ready for St. John, to express a sudden and mysterious defeat and slaughter of God's foes, and of the allies of Babylon.

'This explanation is satisfactory, as far as it goes; and it must be carried further.

'St. John, in the Apocalypse, expresses ideas by Hebrew terms, understood literally.

'Thus, for example, the word Jew is always used in the Apocalypse in a spiritual sense, founded on its Hebrew etymology, which indicates one who confesses and praises God — a true Christian.

'Another reference to Hebrew etymology is found in the word Abaddon, formed by St. John to describe the Angel of the bottomless pit; and derived from a Hebrew term, signifying perdition. . . .

'Observe, also, St. John here specially calls our attention to the Hebrew etymology, by saying that the place is called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

'Armageddon is formed of two Hebrew words; the one signifying a Mountain, the other, a cutting to pieces; and thus it means the Mountain of excision, or of slaughter*.

[*From footnote: 'Lightfoot and Vitringa, who were the first of modern Interpreters that called attention to this etymology, do not seem to have been aware that they had been anticipated by Andreas and Arethas ad loc. (and in the Ancient Greek Catena, Cramer, p. 420,) and also by Ecumenius, ibid. p. 552, who deserve to be cited. Catena Cramer, p. 420. xvi. 16 . . .' ]

'When the Prophet Zechariah is speaking of the destruction of all nations that come against the City of God, he says that there will be a great mourning in the valley of Megiddon; and Megiddon is there translated by the Septuagint Interpreters, cut up, or destroyed.

'The word Armageddon, then, signifies a place of slaughter* [*From footnote: 'Lightfoot, Harmony N.T. on Rev. xvi. “The word Armageddon signifies a Mountain of men cut to pieces.”']; and it connects the judgments predicted in the Apocalypse with those foretold by the Hebrew Prophets.

'If we refer to the third chapter of the Prophet Joel, from the ninth verse to the end, we there see a sublime description of the gathering together of the foes of Christ, and of their final overthrow.

'Multitudes! Multitudes! exclaims the Prophet, in the valley of decision.

'The word here rendered decision is one which signifies threshing, bruising, cutting, and crushing* [*From footnote: 'Joel iii. 14. . . . a threshing instrument, formed with revolving cylinders, armed with sharp pieces of iron. See Jahn Archæol. Bibl. § 64.']; and the words rendered valley of decision are translated by the Septuagint, valley of judgment.

'It is observable, also, that God says by the Prophet Joel, in the same place, that He will gather all nations, and bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat. And again; Let the heathen come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat, for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about. [Joel iii. 12.]

'In the word Jehoshaphat there is an historical reference to a signal and miraculous slaughter of God's enemies in King Jehoshaphat's reign; just as in the word Megiddo there is an historical reference of the same kind.

'And, in both cases, there is something more.

'Megiddo means destruction; and Jehoshaphat signifies judgment of God.

'All nations cannot be gathered together to one valley, or to one mountain, on earth.

'Hence it is rightly concluded, that the Valley of Jehoshaphat here mentioned is a general term for a signal execution of God's Judgment on all His enemies throughout the world.

'In a word, the gathering together of the nations to the Valley of Jehoshaphat, is the same as the gathering together to Armageddon.' (pp. 448-452).

* * * * * * *

Envoi:

From John S Fox's A Flood of Light Upon the Book of Revelation (The Association of the Covenant People, Burnaby, B.C., Canada; circa late 1940s) :

“ARMAGEDDON” AS A EUROPEAN

CONFLAGRATION

'In the Book of Revelation the name “Babylon” . . . certainly does not refer to the old Far-Eastern city, but rather to the New Testament prophetical Papal “Babylon”. That being so, why do prophetic interpreters claim that the reference here to “Ar-Megiddo” (if indeed it refers to “Megiddo” at all: see below) should refer to the Eastern or Palestinian Megiddo, when the whole context of the drama in which it is named occurs within the Papal regime of WESTERN EUROPE!

'There does not seem to be any reference to “Megiddo” at all in this Scripture, the word “Armageddon” being divisible into three Hebrew words; not two as usually suggested. Here the word “Arma” signifies “bare grain”: “Gai” signifies a “valley”: and “Don” signifies “judgment”.

'The composite word Armageddon thus depicts the fact that God's time had come to “thresh Babylon” (See Jer. 51. 33) in the “Valley of Jehoshaphat” which means the Valley where “Jehovah judges”, the name Jehoshaphat meaning “Jehovah judges”.' (pp. 114-115).

The two world wars; & the “Harvest of the earth”

The Mail on Sunday journalist Peter Hitchens, writing in an April 2008 newspaper article (and later blog thread entitled: Was World War Two just as pointless and self-defeating as Iraq . . .) wrote:

'The First and Second World Wars, as [Patrick] Buchanan says [in his book, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War], are really one [great] conflict.'

Centuries before, Vitringa remarked, concerning that great conflict that is styled in the Apocalypse as “Armageddon”; that it would consist of:

'two most signal slaughters, between which some space of time would intervene'.

– As cited in the Rev Joseph Towers' Illustrations of Prophecy, 1796. – The work from which I quoted from extensively in my previous post The best laid schemes of FROGS and men; and again do so below – this time from the next, and final chapter to that prophetic Volume:

CHAPTER XVIL

ON THE SYMBOLIC HARVEST AND VINTAGE.

'The sixth rule, which Dr. Lancaster lays down in his Abridgment of Daubuz's Preliminary Discourse, as an aid in the interpretation of prophecy, is thus expressed: “when the things to be prophesied of in the Revelation are to be considered in several views, there is a change of symbols.” The reason is, says Dr. Lancaster, that as the symbols of prophecy must bear a certain analogy to each other, and must preserve throughout a certain decorum, it is impossible, that the same strain of symbols should represent all that variety of circumstances, which it is sometimes expedient to introduce. “And therefore, when the matters require that they should be considered under another aspect, the strain of the symbols must change, and the scene of the visions alters; so that many symbols may be used to denote the same thing in different respects. Now there are placed such inward marks, which belong to every part of a vision; that we may thereby discover how the matters of that vision are related to the rest. Thus we find what is antecedent and consequent, or what is only collateral; and so it appears what visions and their parts synchronize, and what do not. By this method what as before treated of succinctly is enlarged upon, and more fully demonstrated. So that the Revelation is not wrote in the way of annalists, who, being content to reduce all matters to a chronological series, only relate briefly what happens every year, without enlarging upon the intrigues or causes of the events, and omitting for the most part the consequences; but in the way of the mort judicious historians, who endeavour to give a full account of every matter as they take it in hand, in order to make a complete system of the whole; interposing digressions, and then returning to the principal matters, by giving such hints and transitions, as suffice to let us understand to what they belong, and how, as to point of time, they come in or end with the rest. — And this is the method, not only of the most exact histories and discourses, but in a special manner that of all the inspired writers; in whom the conjunctive particles do rather import, that one passage comes to be related after another, than that it was realty transacted after it.”

'Thus the wars, in which the tyrants of the European world are to be subdued, with their widely scattered partisans, being of such mighty influence in deciding the condition of the human race, are foretold, in several parts of the apocalypse, and under different emblems. Such appears to be the import of THE HARVEST and THE VINTAGE, described in the xivth chapter.

'It is said in v.15 and 16, the harvest of the earth, or the antichristian part of mankind, is ripe. And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth: and the earth was reaped. An “harvest in several places of scripture denotes,” says Dr. Lancaster, some “destroying judgment, by which people fall as corn by the scythe.” It “is sometimes metaphorically used,” observes Mr. Lowth, “to signify an entire destruction, because the harvest makes a clear riddance, and leaves the fields empty and bare.” And Vitringa, speaking of the word just cited from St. John, says, “the clearest arguments demonstrate, that the harvest is to be explained of some judgment of God of a general kind, by which he would take a severe vengeance on the enemies of the church and the adversaries of his people.”

'In v.17 an angel is represented as having a sharp sickle: and the command given unto him (v.18) is, thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. And the angel (v.19) thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great wine-press of the wrath of God. Of the symbols of the prophets some were borrowed from the customs of Judæa. Thus say bp. [bishop] Hurd, “to tread a wine-press, from their custom of pressing grapes, signifies destruction attended with great slaughter.” “The wine-press is called great,” says Daubuz, “because this is not a partial but general punishment.” That this prediction of the vintage alludes to the war of Armageddon, is observed, among other commentators, by Mede, and More, by Durham, Cressener, and Peganius. Vitringa, indeed, declares it to be the opinion of all the best interpreters, that it is a prophecy of the great slaughter which is then to take place.

'Nothing, says this great commentator, is more certain than that this apocalyptic description of the harvest and the vintage is borrowed from the prophet Joel; and he afterwards says, “when I have, with more than usual diligence, compared this prophecy with that of Joel, in which both emblems refer to the same judgment, I have seen no reason for interpreting the emblems of St. John as belonging to separate judgments.” As the emblem of a harvest did not ascertain, whether the enemies of God should be cut off by famine, or pestilence, or war; he remarks, that another and kindred similitude, that of a vintage, was superadded, that it might more conspicuously be evident, that war would be the means employed. “This appears to be the simplest and most easy sense of the prophecy.” I am again quoting the words of Vitringa; “although, if a distinction be made between these emblems, we must say, that God will provide means by his providence, that the enemies of the church should receive two most signal slaughters, between which some space of time would intervene, which agreeably to analogy may be represented by the interval, which separates a harvest from a vintage.” The symbolic grapes are described as fully ripe “That is,” says Vitringa, “the period of the divine forbearance had expired, and villanies, no longer to be tolerated, had arisen to their utmost height. The measure of crimes was filled up. — Punishment therefore could no longer be deferred, but the destroyers of the earth were at length to be destroyed, and were in their turn to meet with their reward.” Vitringa here, in imitation of the prophet, employs the past tense, though speaking of the future. This, he observes, is the period, when our Lord's prophetic parable of the burning of the tares shall be accomplished*. . . .'

[*From footnote: 'Mat. xiii. 39-43. Brenius explains this passage in the same way, and more at large, in his treatise De Regno Ecclesiæ Glorioso.']

(pp. 296-300).

'Reference has been made to a passage of striking import in the iiid. ch. of Joel; which chapter, says. Mr. Lowth, “relates to the latter times of the world.” “Vast multitudes of the Antichristians,” says Dr. Wells, “shall be destroyed” at the period of its accomplishment. It is thought to be prophetic of the very same events which St. John has foretold shall take place in the course of the symbolic vintage and in the war of Armageddon. It begins with foretelling the mighty military preparations which shall be made, and the numerous forces which shall be assembled together by the friends of tyranny and antichristianism. Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles: prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near: let them come up. Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning-hooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong. Assemble yourselves, and come, all ye heathen, and gather yourselves together round about: thither cause thy Mighty Ones to come down, O Lord. Let the heathen be weakened, and come up to the valley of Jehosaphat; for there will I sit to judge[1] all the heathen round about[2]. Put ye in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe: come get ye down, for the press is full, the fats overflow; for their wickedness is great. Multitudes, multitudes[3] in the valley of decision[4]: for the day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision.

[Footnotes: 1. 'To Judge all the heathen, i.e. says bishop Newcome, “to punish by a signal overthrow.” 2. Here the prophet clearly makes a transition, and addresses those, who are to defeat the antichristian party and all the Mighty Ones who are enlisted under its banners. 3. The repetition of this noun signifies, says Dr. Pococke, according to a well attested rule of the Hebrew grammarians, that those spoken of will be extraordinarily numerous. 4. Bp. Newcome renders it, the valley of excision.']

'This prophecy of Joel does, says Vitringa, refer to that time, when great commotions shall arise through all the countries of Europe, and the antichristian empire shall be destroyed; and he observes, that the place styled Armageddon by St. John is the same with the Valley of Jehoshaphat. “The place of this remarkable action,” says Mr. Lowth, “is here called the Valley of Jehoshaphat; as if the prophet had said, the Place where the Lord will execute judgment, for so the word jehoshaphat signifies in the original.”'

(pp. 301-302).

'In reading the predictions which I have recently cited, of future slaughter, humanity cannot but be wounded. But it is proper that the truth should be told. It is time, that those who believe in prophecy should learn, on what class of persons the full weight of the divine vengeance is finally to fall.

'That it is no light matter to pay a servile obedience to the unholy commands of the civil magistrates and the hierarchies, and to assist them in their unrighteous designs, the following alarming declaration will serve to evince. In ch. xiv. of the apocalypse, an angel is represented as saying with a loud voice, if any man worship the Beast and his Image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation. He shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God; i. e. says Mr. Cradock, he “shall partake of severe judgments, the effect of God's wrath.” This passage, in the opinion of Daubuz refers to the accomplishment of the symbolic harvest and vintage, and to the infliction of those judgments which are denominated the Seven Vials [and culminate in the great hail of Rev. xvi 21]. “The threatening,” says this learned commentator, “being levelled against such as any way yield to the religion of the Beast, and submit to the taking only of the public mark of profession in the forehead, as well as giving actual assistance, which is the case of them that take it upon their hands, shews us, that God's plagues affect not only those that presumptuously act in the corruptions, but all those fearful persons, who did not actually resist, or avoid giving way to them.”'

(pp. 303-304).

'In the next verse the prophet adds, that the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the Beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. “The expression for ever and ever is,” says Daubuz, “to be understood during the continuation of the subject; that is, whilst the Beast and False Prophet have adherents, they shall have a perpetual torment.” These awful denunciations, in the opinion of Vitringa, have a double reference; and respect alike the punishments of a future state and the judgments to be inflicted in the present world.'

(p. 304).

The two posts that follow below:

“Hitler's Pope” and A(i)r-mageddon: the “great hail” of Revelation 16:21

are a solemn continuation, from the annuals of history,

of the weighty pronouncements above cited . . .

“Hitler's Pope”

From the Prologue to the above work:

'[Eugenio] Pacelli [later Pope Pius XII] was responsible for a treaty with Serbia which contributed to the tensions that led to the First World War. Twenty years later he struck an accord with Hitler which helped sweep the Führer to legal dictatorship while neutralizing the potential of Germany's 23 million Catholics (34 million after the Anschluss) to protest and resist. . . .

'In 1933 Pacelli found a successful negotiating partner for his Reich Concordat in the person of Adolf Hitler. Their treaty authorized the papacy to impose the new Church law on German Catholics and granted generous privileges to Catholic schools and the clergy. In exchange, the Catholic Church in Germany, its parliamentary political party, and its many hundreds of associations and newspapers “voluntarily” withdrew, following Pacelli's initiative, from social and political action. The abdication of German political Catholicism in 1933, negotiated and imposed from the Vatican by Pacelli with the agreement of Pope Pius XI, ensured that Nazism could rise unopposed by the most powerful Catholic community in the world – a reverse of the situation sixty years earlier, when German Catholics combated and defeated Bismarck's Kulturkampf persecutions from the grass roots. As Hitler himself boasted in a cabinet meeting on July 14, 1933, Pacelli's guarantee of nonintervention left the regime free to resolve the Jewish question. According to the cabinet minutes, “[Hitler] expressed the opinion that one should only consider it as a great achievement. The concordat gave Germany an opportunity and created an area of trust that was particularly significant in the developing struggle against international Jewry.”* [*From Notes: 'Quoted in S. Friedländer, Nazi Germany and the Jews, Vol. I: The Years of Persecution, 1933-39 (London, 1997), 49; Friedländer's German Source, Der Nationalsozialismus: Dokumente 1933-1945. (Frankfurt am Main, 1957), 130.'] The perception of papal endorsement of Nazism, in Germany and abroad, helped seal the fate of Europe.'

(Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pope Pius XII, by John Cornwell; American paperback edition; Penguin Books, 1999, 2000; pp. 4, 6-7).

5

PACELLI AND WEIMAR

'On June 30, 1920, Pacelli presented his credentials to the Reich, the first diplomat to do so under the Weimar government. Thus he became the senior diplomat in the capital, an honor that he was to grace with outstanding charm and distinction. Having warmly welcomed the nuncio, President Friedrich Ebert solemnly announced that his duty was to order, “with the proper authorities, the relations between Church and State in Germany [so] that they correspond to the new situation and to contemporary conditions.” Pacelli responded: “For my part, I will devote my entire strength to cultivating and strengthening the relations between the Holy See and Germany.” (Thirteen years later, Hitler used the self-same phrase, word for word, when he promised an immediate readjustment of relations between Berlin and the Holy See in exchange for the Center Party's acquiescence in the Enabling Act that awarded him dictatorial powers.)'* [*From Notes: 'See Scholder, The Churches and the Third Reich, Vol. I, 62 and 249.'] (ibid. p. 92).

7

HITLER AND GERMAN CATHOLICISM

'Hitler, in fact, had two views on the churches – public and private. In February of 1933 he was to declare in the Reichstag that the churches were to be an integral part of the German national life. Privately, the following month, he vowed to completely “eradicate” Christianity from Germany. “You are either a Christian or a German,” he said. “You cannot be both.”'* [*From Notes: 'Quoted in F. Zipfel, Kirchenkampf in Deutschland, 1933-45 (Berlin, 1965), 9, quoted in M. Housden, Resistance and Conformity in the Third Reich (London, 1997), 46.'] (ibid. pp. 105-106).

'In the spring of 1931, a Catholic Reichstag representative, Karl Trossmann, published a best-selling book entitled Hitler and Rome, in which he described the National Socialists as a “brutal party that would do away with all the rights of the people.” Hitler, he declared, was dragging Germany into a new war, a war that “would only end more disastrously than the last.” Not long after, the Catholic author Alfons Wild published a widely distributed essay entitled “Hitler and Catholicism,” in which he proclaimed that “Hitler's view of the world is not Christianity but the message of race, a message that does not proclaim peace and justice but rather violence and hate.”

'Meanwhile, two Catholic journalists, Fritz Gerlich and Ingbert Naab, excoriated National Socialism in the pages of the Munich-based periodical Der Gerade Weg [The Straight Path], characterizing the movement as a “plague.” In the issue dated July 21, 1932, the writers declared that “National Socialism means enmity with neighboring countries, despotism in internal affairs, civil war, international war. National Socialism means lies, hatred, fratricide and unbounded misery. Adolf Hitler preaches the law of lies. You who have fallen victim to the deceptions of one obsessed with despotism, wake up!”

'This vehement and united front of the Catholic Church in Germany, however, was not at one with the view from inside the Vatican – a view that was being increasingly shaped and promoted by Eugenio Pacelli.' (ibid. p. 110).

The Lateran Treaty and Its Aftermath

'Pius XI and Pacelli realized that no accommodation could be made with Communism, anywhere in the world. In the case of totalitarian movements and regimes of the Right, it was a different matter. In Italy the Holy See had signed a pact with Mussolini in February 1929, foreshadowing Pacelli's 1933 deal with Hitler. Negotiated and drafted by Pacelli's brother, Francesco, and his predecessor as Secretary of State, Pietro Gasparri, the accord, on the face of it and for the time being, ended the antagonisms that had existed between the Holy See and Italy since 1870.

'According to the terms of the Lateran Treaty, Roman Catholicism became the sole recognized religion in the country. . . . The Powerful democratic Catholic Popular Party (the Partito Popolare), in many respects similar to the Center Party in Germany, had been disbanded and its leader, Don Luigi Sturzo, exiled. Catholics had been instructed by the Vatican itself to withdraw from politics as Catholics, leaving a political vacuum in which the Fascists thrived. In the March elections following the Lateran Treaty, priests throughout Italy were encouraged by the Vatican to support the Fascists, and the Pope spoke of Mussolini as “a man sent by Providence.”' (ibid. p. 114).

'A few days after the signing of the Lateran Treaty, Hitler wrote an article for the Völkischer Beobachter [The Racial Observer, the official newspaper of the Nazi party], published on February 22, 1929, warmly welcoming the agreement. “The fact that the Curia is now making peace with Fascism,” he wrote, “shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms.” Turning to the German situation, he rebuked the Center Party leadership for its recalcitrant attachment to democratic politics. “By trying to preach that democracy is still in the best interests of German Catholics, the Center Party . . . is placing itself in stark contradiction to the spirit of the treaty signed today by the Holy See.”' (Ibid. p. 115).

* * *

'By late December [1931], the Pope [Pius XI] was repeating the suggestion to Baron von Ritter, the Bavarian envoy to the Holy See: that a cooperation between the Church in Germany and the National Socialists “perhaps only temporarily and for specific purposes” would “prevent a still greater evil.”'* [*From Notes: 'Report from Ritter to Munich, December 20, 1931, cited in Scholder, The Churches and the Third Reich, Vol. I, 154.'] (ibid. p. 125).

* * *

REAPPRAISALS:

On 26 July 1914, Baron von Ritter, the Chargé d' Affaires of Bavaria at the Holy See, had written to his Government:

“The Pope [Pius X] approves of Austria's harsh treatment of Serbia. He has no great opinion of the armies of Russia and France in the event of a war against Germany. The Cardinal Secretary of State does not see when Austria could make war if she does not decide to do so now.”

(Bayerische Dokumente zum Kriegsausbruch [Bavarian Documents on the Outbreak of War] III, p. 206; as cited in the Vatican Against Europe, by Edmond Paris; The Wickliffe Press [Protestant Truth Society] edition, 1993; p. 47).

* * *

During the first Balkan war the Oesterreichs Katholische Sonntags Blatt expressed the following sentiments:

“Our ideal is not to perpetuate European Turkey, but to bring the Balkan Peninsula into the possession of Catholic Austria and the Catholic Church. . . . Just as a violent storm refreshes and cleanses the oppressive atmosphere, so we hold when it once comes to real war the moral and economic gain to Europe will in the end be very great. The social democracy is not yet strong enough to prevent a war. As a result of the emotional pressure of a European war it will break to pieces with its millions of casual followers, and under the same pressure modern liberalism will also break down. It will not hurt Europe if its conditions are for once well shaken up.”

(As cited in, The Inside Story of Austro-German Intrigue, or, How the World War Was Brought About, by Joseph Goricar, Formerly of the Austro-Hungarian Foreign Service, and Lyman Beecher Stowe; published Garden City New York, Doubleday, Page & Company, 1920; pp. 94-95).

* * *

“One might wonder for what motive the Catholic Church evinces herself so bellicose at an epoch when she is governed by a chief [Pope Pius X] who is truly a saint, imbued with veritably apostolic ideas. The answer is very simple. The Pope and the Curia see in Serbia the ravaging malady that little by little penetrated the Monarchy to the marrow, and which, in time, would end by disintegrating it.

“Despite all the other experiments attempted by the Curia in the course of the last decade, Austria-Hungary is and remains the Catholic State par excellence, the strongest rampart of the Faith which stands in our day for the Church of Christ. The fall of this rampart would signify for the Church the loss of its solidest prop; in the conflicts with the Orthodox Church she would see her most powerful champion struck down.

“Hence, just as for Austria-Hungary there is an immediate necessity of self-preservation to expel from its organism, even by force if need be, the dissolving malady, there is also for the Catholic Church an indirect necessity of doing or approving everything that would serve to attain that end.

“In this light, a harmony between the apostolic sentiment and the war spirit can easily be confirmed.”

(Despatch of 29 July, 1914, from Count Palffy, Austrian Chargé d' Affaires at the Vatican, to Count Berchtold, Austrian Minister of Foreign Affairs; as cited in: Contemporary Italy: Its Intellectual and Moral Origins, by Count Carlo Sforza; Frederick Muller Ltd., London, 1946; p. 154).

* * *

“[T]he Papacy, distressed by the ebbing of its strength . . . will hate Orthodoxy worse than Scepticism, and will endeavour to persuade mankind that they cannot be Christians unless they are Papists, and thus will do the Dragon's work, and promote Infidelity.”

(From: Lectures on the Apocalypse; Critical, Expository, and Practical; Delivered Before the University of Cambridge by Chr. Wordsworth, D.D., Canon of Westminster; Formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; Third Edition; London: Francis & John Rivington, St. Paul's Church Yard, and Waterloo Place, 1852; pp. 387-388).

“Marx & Satan”

There is little doubt in my mind – that with the outbreak of the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 – the same lying spirit that was let loose in the Revolutionary Terror that engulfed France at the close of the eighteenth century, was re-energised, and again erupted upon the war-weary world during the opening decades of the twentieth century – but this time in an explosion of a far greater-reaching and destructive magnitude . . .

The American journalist, and socialist, John Reed appropriately titled his first-hand account of the events of that epoch-shaking event, as Ten Days that Shook the World (1919).

(“And there was a great earthquake [revolution], such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.” Revelation 16:18).

The late Rev Richard Wurmbrand* in his book, Marx & Satan, shined the light of Truth into the spiritual darkness that lay within the hearts of the writers of The Communist Manifesto. Perversely it would be in Russia, amongst the people Marx describes as being “Slavic riffraff”, and a “retrograde” race, that his twisted ideology first fully blossomed and took hold – viz the following from Wurmbrand's above cited work:

“Marx wrote in his new year's roundup of 1848 about 'the Slavic riffraff,' which included [the] Russians [and their kindred peoples] . . . [He wrote that, what he termed] these 'retrograde' races had nothing left for them by fate except 'the immediate task of perishing in the revolutionary world storm.' [Marx also wrote that:] 'The coming world war will cause not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but entire reactionary peoples, to disappear from the face of the earth. And that will be progress.'”

Wurmbrand continues: “Neither Marx nor Engels were concerned about the destruction of millions of people. The former wrote, 'A silent, unavoidable revolution is taking place in society, a revolution that cares as little about the human lives it destroys as an earthquake cares about the houses it ravages. Classes and races that are too weak to dominate the new conditions of existence will be defeated.' ...

“Engels wrote in the same vein:

'The next world war will make whole reactionary peoples disappear from the face of the earth. This, too, is progress. Obviously this cannot be fulfilled without crushing some delicate national flower. But without violence and without pitilessness nothing can be obtained in history.'”

In the Revelation, chapter 16; verses 13-14, (which follows directly after the act of the sixth angel pouring out his vial upon the symbolic Euphrates – which according to Sir Isaac Newton, et al – represents the drying up and decaying Ottoman Empire): it speaks of, “three unclean spirits like frogs . . . [coming] out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils . . . which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.”

There is no doubt in my mind, that Marx and his ideology, were a vast mouthpiece for the “unclean” spirit out of the mouth of the “dragon” (“that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world...” Revelation 12:9).

William T Still, in his book New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies (Huntington House Publishers, 1990), provides us with the following insight into the true nature of the lying spirit here at work:

“Marx was not the only Satanist of his day who professed Communism for political gain. In fact, many of his friends were of like mind. Mikhail Bakunin, the Russian anarchist, admitted the direct connection between Socialist revolutions and Satanism:

'The Evil One is satanic revolt against divine authority, revolt in which we see the fecund germ of all human emancipation, the revolution. Satan [is] the eternal rebel, the first freethinker and the emancipator of worlds. He makes man ashamed of his bestial ignorance and obedience; he emancipates him, stamps upon his brow the seal of liberty and humanity, in urging him to disobey and eat of the fruit of knowledge.'

“Bakunin, who was also a member of [the] Russian nobility, goes on to explain that the true nature of revolutions is not to free the poor from exploitation, but to 'awaken the Devil in the people, to stir up the basest passions. Our mission is to destroy, not to edify.'”

(From: “Chapter Ten: Karl Marx and the Internationale”, op. cit.)

(As to the nature of the other two 'personages' detailed in the Revelation, out of the mouths of which “unclean spirits like frogs” are emitted to call forth “the kings of the earth and of the whole world . . . to . . . the battle of that great day of God Almighty”; I shall not here, at this point, elude to the historical documentation and prophetic works, that, in my opinion, furnish light on this part of the Revelation – and which, indeed, places it firmly within the historical and Historicist context).

But continuing on from the “great earthquake” (of Rev 16:18) that takes place under the seventh Vial; Revelation chapter 16; verses 19-21, describes its affect thus:

“And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell . . . And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found. And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great.”

The quote below is taken from a book produced in association with the Imperial War Museum, entitled World War II (published by Dorling Kindersley Ltd, 2000). In the chapter entitled “A world divided”, the following appears:

“During the early decades of the 20th century, the world was divided into three main political camps. The first consisted of democratic nations, where people elected their own governments . . . The second – fascist Italy and Spain, Nazi Germany, nationalist Japan, and the one-party states of eastern Europe – were ruled by powerful dictators. The final camp had only one member – the Soviet Union. . . . Conflicts between the three ideologies concerning territory and economic wealth led to the world war that broke out in 1939.”

E B Elliot, in his Horæ Apocalypticæ, wrote the following interpretation concerning the seventh Vial of the Apocalypse:

“The result [of this vial is] a most remarkable revolution [which] is . . . destined to befall the European commonwealth; viz . . . [its] final breaking up . . . into a new and tripartite form . . . after fearful wars and convulsions a tripartition like this shall take place in the European commonwealth, it must be regarded as the proximate sign, and very alarum bell to Christendom, of the judgment, the great judgment being then at length close at hand.”

 (Horæ Apocalypticæ: A Commentary on the Apocalypse, Critical and Historical; including also an examination of the chief prophecies of Daniel, Fifth Edition, Vol. IV, Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, London, 1862).

*Rev Wurmbrand (1909-2001) was imprisoned by the Communist regime in his native Romania between 1948-1956 and 1959-1964. Whilst imprisoned he was tortured for his faith in Christ. In May 1966 (having escaped his homeland with the assistance of a Scandinavian mission to the Jews), he testified before the US Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington, DC, about his terrible experiences under Romania's Communist regime.

Darwin & “Realpolitik”

The following is from Sir Fred Hoyle's, The Intelligent Universe: A New View of Creation and Evolution (published by Michael Joseph, London, 1983) :

“The protective instinct in man took a long step backwards from 1860 onwards. Whether Darwinism, with its philosophy that opportunism is all, was the cause of the Realpolitik that overwhelmed the world from 1860 onwards, or whether it was Realpolitik that spawned Darwinism, is hard to say, for the two went hand-in-hand, leading with mounting inevitability to two World Wars in the present century, and to a situation which today looks increasingly like a one-way journey towards self-destruction for the whole species.”

And (once more) Churchill on Realpolitik, (again) from A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Vol. 4, “The Great Democracies”; (Cassel & Company Ltd, 1958, 1974); “Book Twelve; Chapter Fifteen – The Rise of Germany” :

“Realpolitik meant that standards of morality in international affairs could be ignored whenever material advantage might be gained.”