Comments on claims that the Black Nobility control the Jesuits

Blogger “Ahuwah Zeus” asserts that the Black Nobility and other old Roman noble families control the Jesuits, and some other researchers have made similar claims. Youtube vlogger and Reddit blogger “Veritas__Aequitas” strongly disagrees, and has made a video debunking the claims:

I made a comment on the video to open a discussion:

I think it might be a bit more complicated than that. I’ve researched and blogged about Jesuits for about ten years, and based on evidence they most certainly are the most powerful secret society in the world. And yes, the Jesuit foot soldiers of course get their orders from their superiors and the Jesuit General. But could it be that many high level Jesuits are closely connected to these elite bloodlines, or sometimes maybe even part of them. There’s no clear proof that any of these bloodlines control the Jesuits per se, but it makes sense that the elite bloodlines, “black nobility”, and the Jesuits would be entangled, and that Jesuits in a way would be working for them.

Think of it this way: Is it plausible that some commoner with no ties to elite bloodlines gets to be the “most powerful man in the world” if he just gets lucky enough the rise to the top of the Jesuit power structure? I don’t think it all works quite like that, and I find the notion that Jesuits control everything merely by becoming Jesuits an oversimplification.

The Jesuits themselves will of course tell us that all Jesuits obey only the Jesuit General, and that they serve the Pope, but who knows what’s going on behind the scenes among the high level Jesuits. There’s a lot of information about Jesuits easily available in books and the internet, but could it be that there’s a lot of crucial information that’s not accessible to outsiders like us internet conspiracy researchers? Because even though there’s a huge amount of evidence that Jesuits have a lot of power, there’s also some holes in the theory that makes you think there are some missing links that have to be found. What I mean is, there’s many powerful organizations which contribute to the new world order agenda but don’t seem to have any significant/apparent Jesuit connections.

  • farnesius

To which he replied:

“The Jesuits themselves will of course tell us that all Jesuits obey only the Jesuit General”

You ignored the argument in the video showing that this was only revealed when the Jesuit constitutions became available through government intervention since the Jesuits refused to show them to any outsider or civil authority. Actually, you ignored my entire video.

  • Veritas__Aequitas

And here’s the exchange that followed our opening comments:

No, I didn’t ignore it. My point is that of course it wouldn’t be mentioned in the official constitutions of the Jesuit order that “we work for the elite bloodlines” even if they did. Some things are not written down, like it’s not written in the official Vatican documents that the Jesuits rule over the Pope.

It’s likely that you have to have connections to elite bloodlines or be part of them to get promoted to the very highest levels of the Jesuit order, or at least have backing from them. Otherwise anyone, even you or me, could theoretically get to be the “most powerful man in the world” by working our way to the top of the Jesuit power structure. Because anyone can become a Jesuit, and if it was just up to your efforts and merits, anyone could indeed become the Jesuit General. But it’s reasonable to assume that it doesn’t work like that, and that the top Jesuits are _selected_, not elected.

In regards to noble blood, Loyola himself was from a noble family; 3rd Jesuit General Francis Borgia was from the powerful Papal House of Borgia; 5th General Claudio Acquaviva was a son of an Italian Duke; and Wlodimir Ledochowski (General from 1915 to 1942) was a son of a Count, and he was a page to the Austro-Hungarian Empress. There’s probably more, but these are good examples because they’re among the most famous/notorious Jesuit Generals.

I acknowledge that you probably don’t think that literally anyone can become the “most powerful man in the world” just by working hard to get to the top of the Jesuit organization, but I’m exaggerating to provoke thought.

To further elaborate where I’m coming from, here’s comments on some citations and statements on your video, so bare with me.

“The institutions and the fundamental object of the company require its members not to acknowledge the civil power, except so far as it useful to the church and the company; for which reason the Jesuits, although residing in all countries, are not citizens of any, and do not consider themselves bound to obey the laws of nations, unless they are compelled by positive force; they have obtained privileges which are singular. It is therefore by no means surprising that their policy and maxims should have alienated from them the sympathies of the public authorities; and this even in the countries most purely Roman Catholic.”

Yes, this means that the Jesuits didn’t/don’t acknowledge the authority of the kings, rulers, and governments of the countries they reside in. But it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re not working for/with some elite families, and the fact that many of the top Jesuits, especially in the early days, were themselves from noble families lends credence to that the Jesuit order is intertwined with them. It should also be noted that the Roman noble families or the Black Nobility are not a monolithic entity; there’s obviously competition between different families and factions. It was the Kings and Emperors that wanted to suppress them back then, and it was obviously about the power struggle between them and the Jesuits. But many competing noble families were probably siding with the Jesuits even during their suppression in the mid to late 1700s. We know for a fact that the protestant King of Prussia Frederick the Great, and the Orthodox Empress of Russia Catherine the Great protected them at that time.

You’re probably right on that the Farnese family didn’t control the Jesuits, but without them the Jesuits wouldn’t have gotten to the where they were by the late 1500s. They needed the recognition from the Pope so they could use the institutions and networks of the Catholic Church for their own purposes. Cardinal Alessandro Farnese also funded and built the Jesuit mother church in Rome, which is why his name is carved on the facade of the building.

And as I said, the 3rd Jesuit General Francis Borgia was from the very powerful House of Borgia, and then there’s this: When the Knights Templar were abolished in 1312 the king of Aragon founded a new order as their continuation (the Order of Montesa), and while Francis Borgia was the Jesuit General his half-brother Pedro Luis Garcerán de Borja was the grand master of the Order of Montesa. Pedro de Borja was actually the last grand master before the office was united with the Spanish Crown.

I’m not saying the Black Nobility or elite bloodlines necessarily control the Jesuits, but I’m asking questions, because it if you think it through it doesn’t really make sense that a group of commoners would rule the world without the backing of some ruling elite families. The Jesuit order is an organization which is basically open to anyone who’s a Roman Catholic and willing to join it, which is not the case with other powerful organizations and secret societies. I think that’s an important clue not to be dismissed.

And what would the Jesuits be without the Catholic Church? Just a group of men, mostly from common backgrounds. The order’s existence as a powerful organization is dependent on the existence of the Catholic Church. Organizations, societies, and orders come and go, but bloodlines withstand time, and rich and powerful noble families can stand on their own. The point is that even though the Jesuits are a seemingly autonomous organization, I don’t believe they’re in the end really a separate entity from the elite bloodlines that had ruled the world for centuries way before the Jesuit order was even founded.

  • farnesius


“I’m not saying the Black Nobility or elite bloodlines necessarily control the Jesuits”

Yes you are. You are denying the prima facie evidence in this video and making arguments from ignorance and ad hoc fallacies to support yourself which you will apologize for within 24 hours or you can enjoy being banned from this channel. Also there is no such thing as Black Nobility since the Lateran Treaty, 1929; and all titles of nobility were done away with in the Constitution of the Italian Republic, 1947.

  • Veritas__Aequitas


I don’t deny the evidence. I acknowledge that the Jesuits don’t recognize the governments of the countries they reside in, of course they don’t. They see themselves being above the law, but so do the elite families, and they do get away with all kinds of things that ordinary people are held accountable for.

Many of the so called “Black Nobility” families still exist, like Colonna, Pallavicini, Borghese, Odescalchi etc., that’s what I mean. And then there are many other noble families of which members are high level members in Roman Catholic orders like the Knights of Malta, Order of the Holy Sepulchre, Constantinian Order or Teutonic Order. They point is the elite bloodlines haven’t gone anywhere and many of them still have a lot of power.

And I’m NOT saying these noble families control the Jesuit order, but that some of them have at least a symbiotic relationship with the Jesuits. Or not just that, but that the noble families, the Vatican, all the Roman Catholic chivalric orders, and the Jesuits are all intertwined. Do you not agree at least with that? They need each other and have common goals, but sometimes have conflicting interests, which leads to feuds like that between Pope John Paul II and the Jesuits, or the recent ousting of the SMOM Grand Master Matthew Festing.

In regards to conspiracies and secret societies, we sometimes have to acknowledge that we don’t have all the information or hard evidence we need, and because of that we also have to speculate and use circumstantial evidence and discernment. Which is what I’m doing. It’s reasonable to question whether a group of commoners (which the Jesuits at least mostly are to my knowledge) could rule the world without backing from the elite bloodlines as monolithically as Eric Jon Phelps, for example, claims.

My view is that there’s a lot of preselection regarding the Jesuits, meaning that it’s not just up to your efforts or merits if you get the to top of the Jesuit power structure, but that your background matters. In the early days it most certainly did; it’s hardly coincidence that Francis Borgia from the House of Borgia was selected as the 3rd Jesuit General, at the same time when his half-brother Pedro de Borja was the Grand Master of the Order of Montesa, the Roman Catholic order founded by the King of Aragon as a continuation of the Knights Templar.

It’s unfortunate if you decide to block me because I have a large amount of knowledge about the Jesuits, secret societies and new world order relates topics. The topic of this video is the noble families and their power or lack thereof over the Jesuits, so I discuss that here and also speculate. In my blog I usually speculate less, and just present evidence and give a lot of citations and links. My main work has been the Finnish blog “maallikkoapuri” exposing the Vatican, Jesuits, secret societies, conspiracies, and new world order. It has gained a decent following and view count in about ten years. My English written WordPress blog “Dominus ac Redemptor 1773” has until recently only had some short articles and videos, but there’s a few in-depth articles now and I’ll post more soon. Links to the blogs are on my channel.

  • farnesius


“I acknowledge that the Jesuits don’t recognize the governments of the countries they reside in”

Then ipso facto you admit they do not obey the laws of nobles and their now-defunct duchies which is exactly an argument I made in the video among several others including how Jesuit formation separates a man from his family for an extended period of years and how the constitutions which were kept secret for so long make very clear that the Jesuits do not obey anyone else besides their superiors.

“And I’m NOT saying these noble families control the Jesuit order”

You already implied the possibility they could which is straight out denying the citations. You have 12 hours left to apologize to me for being a lying douchebag.

  • Veritas__Aequitas


“Then ipso facto you admit they do not obey the laws of nobles”

But the point is that the nobles, or the elite, don’t obey them, either. Like David Rockefeller, who was likely the most prominent and powerful member of the elite in the USA. He wasn’t subject to governmental authority, he was above the government, being the head of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and founder of the Trilateral Commission among other things. Now, Rockefeller is not “nobility” per se, because it’s more of a European thing, but he was an equivalent of a highest level European nobleman. The Jesuits and the elite are both above the law, that is.

“You already implied the possibility they could which is straight out denying the citations.”

Yes, I implied they COULD, but didn’t say they do. At this point my point of view is that it’s probably just not that cut and dry, like that the Jesuits completely control the elite families. Neither do I claim that the Jesuits are under the control of the elite families. My comments are not meant as conclusive proof of anything, or to debunk your point of view. They’re more of discussion openers. Because I don’t know what the exact truth is, and I might even be totally wrong. When I’m confident about my position I don’t speculate and ask questions, but rather just lay out all the facts and evidence.

But I’ll look more into this and see what I’ll find and then write something about it in the blog. One thing that is known, is that the Jesuits and the House of Medici were closely associated and worked together. But that was in the 1500s and 1600s, and the House of Medici doesn’t exist anymore, so that in and of itself doesn’t yet prove that any of the current Roman/European noble families would have a similar relationship with the Jesuits.

  • farnesius


“But the point is that the nobles, or the elite, don’t obey them”

Total Dunning Kruger. I thought you knew about the Jesuits? A cursory history of their Order shows they openly controlled the monarchs of Europe before their suppression. To this day the royalty of Spain send their children to be Jesuit educated.

“Yes, I implied they COULD”

So citations don’t mean anything to you; you believe the truth cannot be known; you hate the human race and you hate rational inquiry and logic; you hate man and his institutions. You are a scourge upon the earth and you curse the name of Elohim who created man in His image with rational faculties to deduce the truth. You now no longer have a change to apologize to me, you can go drink bleach you fucking cunt.

  • Veritas__Aequitas

So he apparently blocked me.

But regarding the first bolded part; he likely didn’t properly read through my comments, because I made a reference to that in one of my comments;

It was the Kings and Emperors that wanted to suppress them back then, and it was obviously about the power struggle between them and the Jesuits.

But I also added;

But many competing noble families were probably siding with the Jesuits even during their suppression in the mid to late 1700s. We know for a fact that the protestant King of Prussia Frederick the Great, and the Orthodox Empress of Russia Catherine the Great protected them at that time.

And like I stated in one comment, the founder of the Jesuit order Ignatius Loyola was himself a nobleman, as were also at least the 3rd Jesuit General Francis Borgia (Duke of Gandia); the 5th Jesuit General Claudio Acquaviva, a son of an Italian Duke; and the notorious Wlodimir Ledochowski (Jesuit General from 1915 to 1942), a son of a Count.

About the suppression of the Jesuits in the latter half of the 1700s:

The suppression of the Jesuits in the Portuguese Empire (1759), France (1764), the Two Sicilies, Malta, Parma, the Spanish Empire (1767) and Austria and Hungary (1782) is a complex topic. Analysis of the reasons is complicated by the political maneuvering in each country which was not carried on in the open but has left some trail of evidence. The papacy reluctantly went along with the demands of the various Catholic kingdoms involved, and advanced no theological reason for the suppression.

The power and wealth of the Society of Jesus with its influential educational system was confronted by adversaries in this time of cultural change in Europe, leading to the revolutions that would follow. Monarchies attempting to centralize and secularize political power viewed the Jesuits as being too international, too strongly allied to the papacy, and too autonomous from the monarchs in whose territory they operated. By the brief Dominus ac Redemptor (21 July 1773) Pope Clement XIV suppressed the Society of Jesus, as a fait accompli and with no reasons given. Russia, Prussia, and the United States allowed the Jesuits to continue their work, and Catherine the Great allowed the founding of a new novitiate in Russia.

Anyway, to the other bolded part; of course citations mean a lot to me, I rely heavily on citations in my articles, and of course the truth can be known. I only indicated that I don’t, at least yet, know the exact truth about this particular subject matter, and I’m sure most people would’ve understood that was what I meant. The more knowledge I’ve gathered, the more humble I’ve become because I now better realize what I DON’T know. And there are limits to what outsiders like bloggers and truth seekers can know just by reading old conspiracy books from the 1800s – which highlight the influence of the Jesuits back then – or internet articles.

I.e., what do we actually know about the extent of their power today. In my view we don’t really yet have a full picture of what’s going on behind the scenes among the elite, the Jesuits, and between them. A lot of the Jesuit world control theory relies on circumstantial evidence, like that this and this person was Jesuit educated. That’s good evidence; it proves that those people are connected to the Jesuits, and when alumni of Jesuit universities and schools are largely overrepresented in positions of power, like they were especially in the Obama administration, it indicates that the Jesuits have huge influence over political appointments. The same applies to the US Supreme Court as I’ve shown. The annual Catholic Al Smith Dinner is another indication of Jesuit influence on American politics;

The Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, commonly known as the Al Smith Dinner, is an annual white tie dinner in New York City, United States, for fundraising of Catholic charities supporting “the neediest children of the Archdiocese of New York, regardless of race, creed, or color.” Held at New York City’s Waldorf-Astoria Hotel on the third Thursday of October, it is hosted by the Archbishop of New York while organized by the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation in honor of Al Smith who grew up in poverty and later became the Governor of New York four times and the first Catholic nominated as the Democratic candidate for the 1928 United States presidential election.

Cardinal Francis Spellman founded and hosted the first dinner in 1945 after Smith’s death the previous year. By 1960 the Al Smith dinner had become a “ritual of American politics”, in the words of Theodore H. White. It is generally the last event at which the two U.S. presidential candidates share a stage before the election.

As many conspiracy researchers acknowledge, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) largely controls the US government and also the American news media. At the moment five of the 36 members of its board are Jesuit educated, which is significant, but hardly conclusive proof of complete Jesuit control. And even a bit surprisingly none of the 14 officers of the CFR are Jesuit educated. In the comments I mentioned David Rockefeller, the head of one of the elite families, and he was a lifelong leading member and honorary chairman of the CFR, as well as the founder of the globalist think tank Trilateral Commission.

There is more of similar evidence of Jesuit influence in the USA, Europe and the world at large, some of which I’ve already documented in this blog (and there’s more to come), but it would be a bit of a stretch to say it all conclusively proves that the Jesuits and them alone completely control everything. That’s why I these days avoid blanket statements like “Jesuits run the world” or “Jesuits control the USA”.

All in all, “Veritas__Aequitas” repeatedly misrepresented my arguments, and hence we ended up talking past each other most of the time. My sense is that he sincerely somewhat misinterpreted what I was trying to say, which was that it’s perhaps not that cut and dry as the theories about the Jesuits completely controlling the world would have us believe. These theories suggest that even all the elite families are under total control of the Jesuits, whereas my point of view at this point is that the relationship between these entities could also be symbiotic, that they could be more like allies who have common goals, with the high level Jesuits likely being the more dominant party. But as I said in my last comment, I’ll look more into this and then make some conclusions from what I’ve got.

As to the latter part of the last comment by “Veritas__Aequitas”, I don’t think I’ve ever received such a tirade of ad hominems even by conspiracy theory debunkers, internet trolls, or those who vehemently claim that the Jews run the world and get triggered when I bring up the Jesuits. So I don’t know what on earth that was about.

The interconnection between the Knights Templar, Freemasonry, Jesuits (and Illuminati)

Both Freemasonry and the Society of Jesus (aka Jesuit order) can be seen as having more or less evolved from the Knights Templar, and the Jesuits most likely also had a hand in the creation of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. We will go through the most relevant historical evidence step by step to prove the interconnection between these fraternal orders.

Who were the Knights Templar?

Let’s begin with a brief look at the the history of the Knights Templar, the legendary Catholic crusader military order:

The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon (Latin: Pauperes commilitones Christi Templique Salomonici), also known as the Order of Solomon’s Temple, the Knights Templar or simply the Templars, were a Catholic military order recognised in 1139 by the papal bull Omne datum optimum. The order was founded in 1119 and was active until about 1312.

The order, which was among the wealthiest and most powerful, became a favoured charity throughout Christendom and grew rapidly in membership and power. They were prominent in Christian finance. Templar knights, in their distinctive white mantles with a red cross, were among the most skilled fighting units of the Crusades. Non-combatant members of the order, who formed as much as 90% of the order’s members, managed a large economic infrastructure throughout Christendom, developing innovative financial techniques that were an early form of banking, building its own network of nearly 1,000 commanderies and fortifications across Europe and the Holy Land, and arguably forming the world’s first multinational corporation.

The Templars were closely tied to the Crusades; when the Holy Land was lost, support for the order faded. Rumours about the Templars’ secret initiation ceremony created distrust, and King Philip IV of France – deeply in debt to the order – took advantage of the situation to gain control over them. In 1307, he had many of the order’s members in France arrested, tortured into giving false confessions, and burned at the stake. Pope Clement V disbanded the order in 1312 under pressure from King Philip.

The Templar Order, though its members were sworn to individual poverty, was given control of wealth beyond direct donations. A nobleman who was interested in participating in the Crusades might place all his assets under Templar management while he was away. Accumulating wealth in this manner throughout Christendom and the Outremer, the order in 1150 began generating letters of credit for pilgrims journeying to the Holy Land: pilgrims deposited their valuables with a local Templar preceptory before embarking, received a document indicating the value of their deposit, then used that document upon arrival in the Holy Land to retrieve their funds in an amount of treasure of equal value. This innovative arrangement was an early form of banking and may have been the first formal system to support the use of cheques; it improved the safety of pilgrims by making them less attractive targets for thieves, and also contributed to the Templar coffers.

Based on this mix of donations and business dealing, the Templars established financial networks across the whole of Christendom. They acquired large tracts of land, both in Europe and the Middle East; they bought and managed farms and vineyards; they built massive stone cathedrals and castles; they were involved in manufacturing, import and export; they had their own fleet of ships; and at one point they even owned the entire island of Cyprus. The Order of the Knights Templar arguably qualifies as the world’s first multinational corporation.

The Knights Templar have, in fact, often been called the first “international bankers”, besides being a military religious order.

Jesuits – the revived Knights Templar?

Hughes de Payens himself had not that keen and far-sighted intellect nor that grandeur of purpose which afterward distinguished the military founder of another soldiery that became formidable to kings. The Templars were unintelligent and therefore unsuccessful Jesuits.

  • Albert Pike, 33rd Degree Freemason, Morals and Dogma, 1871, p. 819

But, how and why would the Jesuit Order be a continuation, or a more sophisticated, new version of the Knights Templar?

The first clue is in the common symbolism of these two orders. The Knights Templar were known for their motto in hoc signo vinces (IHSV), which means “in this sign you will conquer”, and was originally credited to the first Christian Roman Emperor, Constantine the Great.

Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius was an early Christian author (c. 240 – c. 320) who became an advisor to the first Christian Roman emperor, Constantine I (and tutor to his son), guiding the Emperor’s religious policy as it developed during his reign. His work De Mortibus Persecutorum has an apologetic character, but has been treated as a work of history by Christian writers. Here Lactantius preserves the story of Constantine’s vision of the Chi Rho before his conversion to Christianity. The full text is found in only one manuscript, which bears the title, Lucii Caecilii liber ad Donatum Confessorem de Mortibus Persecutorum.

The historian bishop Eusebius of Caesaria states that Constantine was marching with his army (Eusebius does not specify the actual location of the event, but it is clearly not in the camp at Rome), when he looked up to the sun and saw a cross of light above it, and with it the Greek words “(ἐν) τούτῳ νίκα” (“In this, conquer”), a phrase often rendered into Latin as in hoc signo vinces (“in this sign, you will conquer”).

But the Templars also used the IHS monogram, which is today normally associated with the Jesuits, as it’s in the official seal of the Jesuit order. Here we have the IHS monogram in a church built by the Templars:


Here’s the Templar cross:


Let’s then look at the IHS symbol right above the entrance of the Church of the Gesu, the mother church of the Jesuits, in Rome:


So, there we have the Templar cross on top of the H, only in color black here as opposed to the usual red.

The Order of Montesa, the Borgia family and the Jesuits

And now for the historical evidence linking the Jesuits to the Knights Templar. From the Catholic Encyclopedia (1913), regarding the dissolution of the Templar order, we read:

The pope, irresolute and harrassed, finally adopted a middle course: he decreed the dissolution, not the condemnation of the order, and not by penal sentence, but by an Apostolic Decree (Bull of 22 March, 1312). The order having been suppressed, the pope himself was to decide as to the fate of its members and the disposal of its possessions. As to the property, it was turned over to the rival Order of Hospitallers to be applied to its original use, namely the defence of the Holy Places. In Portugal, however, and in Aragon the possessions were vested in two new orders, the Order of Christ in Portugal and the Order of Montesa in Aragon. As to the members, the Templars recognized guiltless were allowed either to join another military order or to return to the secular state. In the latter case, a pension for life, charged to the possessions of the order, was granted them. On the other hand, the Templars who had pleaded guilty before their bishops were to be treated “according to the rigours of justice, tempered by a generous mercy”.

So, the Templars’ property was handed over to another Papal crusader order, the Knights Hospitaller, of which continuation today is the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (SMOM) aka Knights of Malta which was established in the 19th century after the original order had dispersed in 1798 with the French invasion of Malta led by Napoleon Bonaparte. Except, in Portugal and Aragon where the possessions of the Templars were given to the newly founded Order of Montesa.

The Order of Montesa (Valencian: Ordre de Montesa, Aragonese and Spanish: Orden de Montesa) is a Christian military order, territorially limited to the old Crown of Aragon. It was named after the castle of Montesa, its headquarters.

The Knights Templar had been received with enthusiasm in Crown of Aragon from their foundation in 1128. King Alfonso I of Aragon, having no direct heir, bequeathed his dominions to be divided among the Knights Templar, the Knights Hospitaller, and the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, but this bequest was annulled by his subjects in 1131. The Knights Templar had to be contented with certain castles, the chief of which was Monzón. Although the Aragonese branch of the order was pronounced innocent at the famous trial of the Templars, Pope Clement V‘s Bull of suppression was applied to them in spite of the protests of King James II of Aragon in 1312.

King James II persuaded Pope John XXII to permit him to regroup the Templar properties in Aragon and Valencia, and to create a new military order not essentially differing from that of the Templars, which should be charged with the defence of the frontier against the Moors and the pirates. The new order was dedicated to Our Lady, and based at Montesa. Pope John XXII approved it on 10 June 1317, and gave it the Cistercian rule.

The order derived its title from St. George of Montesa, its principal stronghold. It was affiliated to the Order of Calatrava, from which its first recruits were drawn, and it was maintained in dependence upon that order.

The first of the fourteen grand masters was Guillermo d’Eril. In 1485, Philip of Viana renounced the Archdiocese of Palermo to become grand master. He died fighting the Kingdom of Granada in 1488. The office of grand master was united with the Crown by Philip II in 1587.

And who was the last grand master before the office was united with the Spanish Crown? Pedro Luis Garceran de Borja, the half-brother of St. Francis Borgia, the third Superior General of the Jesuit order. They were from the House of Borgia which produced two Popes.

The House of Borgia (/ˈbɔːrʒə/; Italian: Borgia [ˈbɔrdʒa]; Spanish and Aragonese: Borja [ˈboɾxa]; Valencian: Borja[ˈbɔɾʒa]) was an Italo-Spanish noble family, which rose to prominence during the Italian Renaissance. They were from Aragon, the surname being a toponymic from the town of Borja, then in the Crown of Aragon, in Spain.

The Borgias became prominent in ecclesiastical and political affairs in the 15th and 16th centuries, producing two popes: Alfons de Borja, who ruled as Pope Callixtus III during 1455–1458, and Rodrigo Lanzol Borgia, as Pope Alexander VI, during 1492–1503.

Especially during the reign of Alexander VI, they were suspected of many crimes, including adultery, incest, simony, theft, bribery, and murder (especially murder by arsenic poisoning). Because of their grasping for power, they made enemies of the Medici, the Sforza, and the Dominican friar Savonarola, among others. They were also patrons of the arts who contributed to the Renaissance.

The original emblem of the Order of Montesa was basically the Templar Cross, as we can see below in the picture of Francisco Crespi de Borja, another Knight of the order from the House of Borgia.

Francisco Crespi de Borja, Order of Montesa


The current emblem is an amalgamation of the Templar cross and the emblem of the Order of Calatrava (dissolved in 1838), as the two orders were affiliated.


The House of Borgia were a major force behind the Jesuit order in its early days, and even more so were the House of Farnese.

The Farnese family was an influential family in Renaissance Italy. The titles of Duke of Parma and Piacenza and Duke of Castro were held by various members of the family.

Its most important members included Pope Paul III, Alessandro Farnese (a cardinal), Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma (a military commander and Governor of the Spanish Netherlands), and Elisabeth Farnese, who became Queen of Spain and whose legacy was brought to her Bourbon descendants.

A number of important architectural works and antiquities are associated with the Farnese family, either through construction or acquisition. Buildings include the Palazzo Farnese in Rome and the Villa Farnese at Caprarola, and ancient artifacts include the Farnese Marbles.

Pope Paul III was the one who officially established the Jesuit order in 1540, and his grandson Cardinal Alessandro Farnese was the one who built the Church of the Gesu. Thats why the name of Alessandro Farnese is carved on the facade of the church, above the fore-mentioned IHS emblem with the Templar cross.

Church of the Gesu in the Piazza del Gesu, Rome.


The Jesuits and Freemasonry

Was the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry actually created by French Jesuits affiliated with the dethroned and exiled adherents of the Scottish Catholic House of Stuart? Looking at historical sources, it seems plausible it was.

In the eighteenth century the Jesuits were charged with having an intimate connection with Freemasonry, and the invention of the Degree of Kadosh was even attributed to those members of the Society who constituted the College of Clermont. This theory of a Jesuitical Freemasonry seems to have originated with the Illuminati, who were probably governed in its promulgation by a desire to depreciate the character of all other Masonic systems in comparison with their own, where no such priestly interference was permitted. Barruel scoffs at the idea of such a connection, and cans it (Histoire de Jacobinisme iv, page 287) “la fable de la Franc-Maçonnerie Jésuitique” meaning an invention of false or Jesuitical Freemasonry. For once he is right. Like oil and water the tolerance of Freemasonry and the intolerance of the “Society of Jesus” cannot commingle. Yet it cannot be denied that, while the Jesuits have had no part in the construction of pure Freemasonry, there are reasons for believing that they took an interest in the invention of some Degrees and systems which were intended to advance their own interests. But wherever they touched the Institution they left the trail of the serpent.

They sought to convert its pure philanthropy and toleration into political intrigue and religious bigotry. Hence it is believed that they had something to do with the invention of those Degrees, which were intended to aid the exiled house of Stuart in its efforts to regain the English throne, because they believed that would secure the restoration in England of the Roman Catholic religion. Almost a library of books has been written on both sides of this subject in Germany and in France.

  • Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences

This degree originated thirty years before the French Revolution of 1789, and was active in producing it. The lodge-theory was that of the anarchists of today, that, if institutions or religion, and government were abolished;, human passions, like fluids, would find their level in universal peace and happiness. Communists guillotined their king, and hung their bishops to lampposts; proclaimed “liberty and equality;” and put their religious creed over the gate of their cemetery: “There is no God! Death is an eternal sleep.” The last degree of their system required the candidate to stab his brother, or nearest friend, as a traitor to the lodge, and amid the brother’s groans, and pleadings for his life, they laid the candidate’s gloved hand on the beating heart of a lamb. And, if he stabbed, they removed the blinder, and swore him to vengeance against Church and State. This was “The Royal Secret.” This explains the vengeance sworn in this and other degrees of that day. (See Robison’s Conspiracy, p. 299.) But, in this country, and at this day, this degree is senseless, and worthless. Its bluster about freeing the people, is meaningless, and itself not worth reading.

But how happens this once “Ne plus ultra” degree to be so prolix and stupid as to be scarce worth reading?

The answer is this: when formed by Jacobin Jesuits, in 1754, in the Jesuits’ College of Clermont, Paris, it was “the Military Organization,” as the candidate was told. It then crowned the Rite of Perfection of 25 degrees, which was adopted by “the Council of Emperors,” four years later; that is, in 1758. The Jacobins, like the Chicago anarchists lately hung were then secretly swearing to do what they afterwards did, viz., wage war on the government. Hence this 32nd grade was not called a degree, but an “organization,” as it was. But when adopted by Morin’s Sovereign Inspectors, at Charleston, S. C., in 1801, no war was then contemplated, but by Aaron Burr, and he was soon tried by Jefferson, for his life. The country was then peaceful, and satisfied and pleased with their free constitution, adopted in 1789, only twelve years before. Of course, no fighting was contemplated. True French sympathizers elected Jefferson that year; but the French revolution had reacted, and the Monroe doctrine was soon adopted, to keep the United States free from foreign entanglements. Masonry now did not mean fight, but money and false worship.

What then were Dalcho, Mitchell and Provost to do? They had resolved on an “Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite,” to rule the false worships of Masonry throughout the world. They adopted a scale of thirty-two degrees; and placed this Military degree at the head: because, it had been, as the notes and ritual say: “the Ne Plus Ultra degree,” and it would not do to leave it out. They therefore stretched it, and stuffed it into its present shape, prolix enough. Hence the hotch-potch flummery of a camp of nine sides, with stupid Masonic explanations for every corner.

But the one “mission and object” (Mackey) of Masonry is kept steadily in view; which is the worship of the god of this world, who is Satan, as the “Grand Architect of the Universe;” and to accomplish this by inventing “a religion in which all mankind agree;” and this, by putting all earth’s religions upon a level, and uniting them together in Masonic worship, which is boldly avowed in rituals, lexicons, and philosophical degrees. This is, (in Revelation, 13, 14,) called: the image of the beast, made by “them, that dwell on the earth;” that is, everybody; every creed, and no creed; all who join secret lodges. But this world-religion must have some form and shape, to hold together; and be taxed; hence, it takes the form, or image, of the beast. Lodge despotism is as absolute as Romish despotism, and is the image of it; and it is made, as we have seen, by the lamb-dragon beast, which is Popery; “that great city, (Rome) which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” (Rev, 17, 18.)

The 32nd Degree of the Scottish Rite even has the same motto as the Jesuits – ad majorem Dei gloriam, which means “For the greater glory of God”:

But the key to the importance of this 32nd degree, is its MOTTO: “Ad majorem Dei gloriam.” This is the motto of the Jesuits; who, with the apostate Ramsay, made these French degrees, falsely called Scottish. This motto was adopted by their founder, Ignatius Loyola; and is still the motto of the order which he founded, in an underground chapel of the Holy Martyrs in 1534, seventeen years after Luther nailed his Theses to the church door at Wittenberg, in 1517. The reformation had only fairly begun, and this underground, secret order of Jesuits met the Reformation, and has turned it back. Some principalities in Germany, once Protestant, are now under Popish princes! That order now rules Popedom, though once prohibited by it, as Masonry is now.

A confirmation by a Masonic authority:

Field blue; on it is a golden lion, holding in his mouth a key of gold, and a gold collar around his neck, with the figures 525 on the collar. Motto at the base, “Custos Areani,” and in some rituals, “Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam” – the latter is the motto of the Jesuits. Around this standard are stationed the Knights of the Sun, the Commanders of the Temple, and the Princes of Mercy, 28th, 27th, and 26th degrees. Standard Bearer, Aholiab.

Incidentally, the the black solar symbol on the official seal of the Jesuit order also has exactly 32 rays;


After the Jesuit order was officially suppressed by Pope Clement XIV in 1773 by the brief Dominus ac Redemptor, the greatest protectors of Jesuits in Europe were Catherine the Great, the Orthodox Empress of Russia, and Frederick the Great, the protestant King of Prussia.

When the Society of Jesus was suppressed, the Pope permitted the rulers of individual countries not to issue the bull of suppression. Catherine of Russia was the most famous of those who did not promulgate the bull, but Frederick II of Prussia was another. On September 13 1773 he informed Pope Clement XIV that the Jesuits would not be suppressed in Prussia.

King Frederick II of Prussia and Tsarina Catherine II of Russia, apprehensive that the Society’s suppression would antagonise their new Polish subjects through the disruption or destruction of the Jesuit colleges, refused to promulgate and enforce the brief. News of Prussia’s recalcitrance reached Rome first. There were stories of the opening of a novitiate, of the king’s use of Jesuits in public functions, and of Frederick’s soliciting the Sorbonne’s opinion on the legitimacy of the Society’s survival to quell the scruples of some Jesuits who believed their continuation depended solely on a technicality. The Society survived in Prussia until 3 January 1776. But even after that date reports continued to reach Rome about the Prussian king’s fondness for the Society.

  • Thomas McCoog SJ, Jesuit Restoration – Part Three: The Survival of the Jesuits, August 20, 2014

And, as it happens, Frederick the Great was a Freemason.

Frederick II, King of Prussia, surnamed the Great, was born on January 14, 1712, and died on August 17, 1786, at the age of seventy-four years and a few months. He was initiated as a Freemason, at Brunswick, on the night of August 14, 1738, not quite two years before he ascended the throne… We hear no more of Frederick’s Freemasonry in the printed records until the 16th of July, 1774, when he granted his protection to the National Grand Lodge of Germany, and officially approved of the treaty with the Grand Lodge of England, by which the National Grand Lodge was established. In the year 1777, the Mother Lodge, Royal York of Friendship, at Berlin, celebrated, by a festival, the king’s birthday, on which occasion Frederick wrote the following letter, which, as it is the only printed declaration of his opinion of Freemasonry that is now extant, is well worth copying:

“I cannot but be sensible of the new homage of the Lodge Royal York of Friendship on the occasion of the anniversary of my birth bearing, as it does the evidence of its zeal and attachment for my person. Its orator has well expressed the sentiments which animate all its labors; and a society which employs itself only in sowing the seed and bringing forth the fruit of every kind of virtue in my dominions may always be assured of my protection. It is the glorious task of every good sovereign and I will never cease to fulfill it. And so I pray God to take you and your Lodge under his holy and deserved protection.”

  • Albert G. Mackey, Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences

The “Piazza del Gesu Freemasons”, Jesuits and Mussolini

In Italy, there’s a Masonic lodge called Gran Loggia d’Italia degli ALAM (Antichi Liberi Accettati Muratori) or “Grand Lodge of Italy of the A.F.& A.M. (Antient Free and Accepted Masons)”. It was formed by a large group of Scottish Rite Freemasons who left the Grand Orient of Italy (GOI) after a schism in 1908. The schism happened because they disagreed with the radical and anticlerical orientation the GOI had taken after electing a new Grand Master. And so, the exiled Masons founded a new more pro-Church lodge, and they were popularly known as the “Piazza del Gesu Freemasons” because their headquarters was originally at the Piazza del Gesu, Rome, practically right next to the mother church of the Jesuits!

On May 19, 1922, the Grand Lodge of Italy was invited to Lausanne for the World Conference of the supreme Scottish rite councils, to the detriment of the Grand Orient of Italy . This new recognition translated into a real triumph for Palermi, who, galvanized by the success achieved in Lausanne, openly showed his support for fascism by applauding the March on Rome, and sending an official telegram with which he wished for the success of the newborn Mussolini Government.

The support of the Masonic communion of Piazza del Gesù at the taking of power by Mussolini was not a mere declaration of courtesy. The American historian Peter Tompkins in the book “Dalle carte segrete del Duce“, (2001), has shown that all four “quadrumvirs” of the March on Rome (Italo Balbo, Michele Bianchi, Cesare Maria De Vecchi and Emilio De Bono) belonged to the Grand Lodge of Italy.’avvento_del_Fascismo


On February 11, 1929, Benito Mussoloni, the Fascist dictator of Italy, signed the Lateran Treaty with the Papacy which led to the creation of the independent Vatican City State:

The Lateran Treaty (Italian: Patti Lateranensi; Latin: Pacta Lateranensia) was one of the Lateran Pacts of 1929 or Lateran Accords, agreements made in 1929 between the Kingdom of Italy and the Holy See, settling the “Roman Question“. They are named after the Lateran Palace, where they were signed on 11 February 1929. The Italian parliament ratified them on 7 June 1929. It recognized Vatican City as an independent state, with the Italian government, at the time led by Benito Mussolini as prime minister, agreeing to give the Roman Catholic Church financial compensation for the loss of the Papal States. In 1947, the Lateran Treaty was recognized in the Constitution of Italy as regulating the relations between the state and the Catholic Church.

Jesuit priest Pietro Tacchi Venturi was a middleman between Mussolini and the Papacy:

Pietro Tacchi Venturi (Italian pronunciation: [ˈpjɛtro ˈtakki venˈturi]; 1861—March 18, 1956) was a Jesuit priest and historian who served as the unofficial liaison between Benito Mussolini, the Fascist leader of Italy from 1922 to 1943, and popes Pius XI and Pius XII. He was also one of the architects of the 1929 Lateran Treaty, which ended the “Roman Question” (a dispute over the status of the papacy since the Italian unification), and recognized the sovereignty of Vatican City, which made it an actor of international relations. A claimed attempt to assassinate Venturi with a paper knife (actually the result of a homosexual lover’s quarrel), one year before the treaty’s completion, made headlines around the world. Venturi had begun the process of reconciliation by convincing Mussolini to donate the valuable library of the Palazzo Chigi to the Vatican.

The Knights Templar, Vatican and Freemasonry

Now, in regards to Freemasonry, we don’t really even have to look at history to see the obvious connection to the Knights Templar.

There’s an order affiliated with Freemasonry that’s actually called the Knights Templar (full name The United Religious, Military and Masonic Orders of the Temple and of St John of Jerusalem, Palestine, Rhodes and Malta). The individual orders united within this system are principally the Knights of the Temple (Knights Templar), the Knights of Malta (named after the Papal military order Knights of Malta), the Knights of St Paul, and only within the York Rite, the Knights of the Red Cross.

York Rite Knights Templar regalia


Then there is the Christian fraternal order Red Cross of Constantine, or more formally the Masonic and Military Order of the Red Cross of Constantine and the Appendant Orders of the Holy Sepulchre and of St John the Evangelist which was inspired by the Roman Catholic dynastic order Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George. The Constantinian Order was of course named after Constantine the Great, and their motto is the same as for Templars, i.e., in hoc signo vinces.

Red Cross of Constantine regalia


Cross of the Constantian Order


The Red Cross of Constantine also has an appendant order called the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, named after the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, a prestigious Papal chivalric order.

Lastly, below is an emblem of the York Right Knights Templar from the 1800s with the IHS monogram inside a Masonic pyramid symbol. Even if it wasn’t intended, one could see it symbolizing the interconnection between the Knights Templar, Freemasons, and the Jesuits.


The Suppression of the Jesuits, Illuminati and the French Revolution

The Illuminati was founded on May 1, 1776 by Adam Weishaupt, three years after the suppression of the Jesuits.

Adam Weishaupt was born on 6 February 1748 in Ingolstadt in the Electorate of Bavaria. Weishaupt’s father Johann Georg Weishaupt (1717–1753) died when Adam was five years old. After his father’s death he came under the tutelage of his godfather Johann Adam Freiherr von Ickstatt who, like his father, was a professor of law at the University of Ingolstadt. Ickstatt was a proponent of the philosophy of Christian Wolff and of the Enlightenment, and he influenced the young Weishaupt with his rationalism. Weishaupt began his formal education at age seven at a Jesuit school. He later enrolled at the University of Ingolstadt and graduated in 1768 at age 20 with a doctorate of law. In 1772 he became a professor of law. The following year he married Afra Sausenhofer of Eichstätt.

After Pope Clement XIV’s suppression of the Society of Jesus in 1773, Weishaupt became a professor of canon law, a position that was held exclusively by the Jesuits until that time. In 1775 Weishaupt was introduced to the empirical philosophy of Johann Georg Heinrich Feder of the University of Göttingen. Both Feder and Weishaupt would later become opponents of Kantian idealism.

It is said Weishaupt then became deeply anticlerical which was his supposed motive to attack the Catholic Church. I’ve even seen claims about Weishaupt having been fervently anti-Jesuit because they supposedly treated him badly while he was a professor at their university. That’s been used as an argument by some who try to debunk the Jesuit conspiracy.

But was he really? Adolph Knigge, a leading member of the Illuminati, actually accused him of being a secret Jesuit before his departure from the order in 1784:

But in 1783 dissensions arose between Knigge and Weishaupt, which resulted in the final withdrawal of the former on 1 July, 1784. Knigge could no longer endure Weishaupt’s pedantic domineering, which frequently assumed offensive forms. He accused Weishaupt of “Jesuitism”, and suspected him of being “a Jesuit in disguise” (Nachtr., I, 129). “And was I”, he adds, “to labour under his banner for mankind, to lead men under the yoke of so stiff-necked a fellow?—Never!”

So, was Weishaupt fighting against the Catholic Church because he was ideologically anticlerical, or was he in reality a frontman for the Jesuits? And was the Illuminati used as a proxy to get back at the Papacy which had officially suppressed the Jesuit order in 1773 with the brief Dominus ac Redemptor, and at the Catholic Monarchs that had expelled them?

As most conspiracy researchers know, the Illuminati was allegedly behind the French Revolution of 1789 through having infiltrated Freemasonry. This theory was first presented by John Robison in his Proof of a Conspiracy (1797), and Augustin Barruel in Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism (1799);

Towards the end of his life, he became an enthusiastic conspiracy theorist, publishing Proofs of a Conspiracy … in 1797, alleging clandestine intrigue by the Illuminatiand Freemasons (the work’s full title was Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the secret meetings of Freemasons, Illuminati and Reading Societies). The secret agent monk, Alexander Horn provided much of the material for Robison’s allegations. French priest Abbé Barruel independently developed similar views that the Illuminati had infiltrated Continental Freemasonry, leading to the excesses of the French Revolution. In 1798, the Reverend G. W. Snyder sent Robison’s book to George Washington for his thoughts on the subject in which he replied to him in a letter:

“It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am. The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation). That Individuals of them may have done it, or that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects; and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.”

Interestingly enough, Barruel used to be a Jesuit priest, so make of that what you will. Anyway, many of the revolutionary leaders were indeed Freemasons:

The Lodge Les Neuf Sœurs was a prominent lodge attached to the Grand Orient de France that was particularly influential in organising French support for the American Revolution and later in the intellectual ferment that preceded the French Revolution. Benjamin Franklin was a member of this Lodge when he was serving as liaison in Paris.

Some notable French revolutionaries were Freemasons, including Marquis de LafayetteMarquis de Condorcet, Mirabeau, Georges Danton, the Duke of Orléans, and Hébert.

Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orléans, a leader of the Liberal Aristocracy, was the Grand Master of the Grand Orient at the time of the French Revolution. In some parts of France, the Jacobin Clubs were continuances of Masonic lodges from the Ancien Régime, and according to historian Alan Forrest “some early clubs, indeed, took over both the premises and much of the membership of masonic lodges, before rebadging themselves in the new idiom of the revolution.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia alleges that the Masonic book La Franc-Maçonnerie, écrasée in 1746 predicted the program of the French Revolution, and claims to quote documents of the Grand Orient of France where Freemasonry claims credit for the French Revolution. However, the New Catholic Encyclopedia of 1967 says that modern historians see Freemasonry’s role in the French Revolution as exaggerated.

Voltaire (1694-1778), who didn’t himself participate but was regarded as a forerunner of the revolution, was a Freemason as well. Voltaire was also Jesuit educated, like Marquis de Condorcet, Marquis de Lafayette, and Maximilien Robespierre who led the Reign of Terror (1793-1794).

Napoleon’s onslaught on Catholic Monarchies, Papacy and the Knights of Malta

Jesuit educated Catholic priest Emmanuel Joseph Sieyes was another key figure in the revolution, but later in 1799 he instigated the coup that brought Napoleon Bonaparte to power.

Before that as a military general, Napoleon defeated the 1795 pro-Catholic royalist rebellion against the National Convention which was the first French Revolution government. The defeat of the royalist insurrection extinguished the threat to the Convention and earned Bonaparte sudden fame, wealth and the patronage of the new government, the Directory, and he was then promoted to Commander of the Interior and given command of the Army of Italy, a field army of the French Army stationed on the Italian border and used for operations in Italy itself. It’s best known for its role during the French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1802) and Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815).

In the first Italian campaign Bonaparte defeated the Catholic Habsburg Monarchy’s Austrian forces, and the Treaty of Campos gave France control over most of northern Italy and Low Countries. Then Bonaparte marched on Venice and forced its surrender, ending 1100 years of independence (697-1797) for the Republic of Venice.

As was already mentioned above, during the French Campaign in Egypt and Syria (1798-1800), General Bonaparte invaded Malta in 1798, then ruled by the Order of St. John aka Knights Hospitaller;

Following the capture of Malta, Napoleon landed at Valletta on 13 June. He stayed on the island for six days, spending the first night at the Banca Giuratale and later staying at Palazzo Parisio, before most of the French fleet embarked for the campaign in Egypt. General Vaubois remained on the island with a garrison in order to maintain control, thereby establishing the French occupation of Malta. During his short stay, Napoleon dictated instructions which radically reformed the Maltese government and society, so as to bring it in line with French Republican ideals.

A few days after the capitulation, the Grand Master and many knights left the island, taking with them few movable possessions including some relics and icons. The Order received shelter from Paul I of Russia, who was eventually proclaimed Grand Master by some knights. The Order gradually evolved into the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, which still exists today and has sovereignty but no territory.

Why is this significant in this context? Because of this:

Malta was at the time a vassal of the Kingdom of Sicily, and Grandmaster Manuel Pinto da Fonseca, himself a Portuguese, followed suit, expelling the Jesuits from the island and seizing their assets. These assets were used in establishing the University of Malta by a decree signed by Pinto on 22 November 1769, with lasting effect on the social and cultural life of Malta. The Church of the Jesuits (in Maltese Knisja tal-Ġiżwiti), one of the oldest churches in Valletta, retains this name up to the present.

So, Malta was one of the Catholic-ruled territories where the Jesuit had been suppressed, the others being the Portuguese Empire (1759), France (1764), the Two Sicilies, Parma, the Spanish Empire (1767) and Austria and Hungary (1782). And ever since the Jesuits were restored in 1814 the Knights of Malta have been de facto subordinate to them.

Then with the Napoleonic Wars, the French Empire subjugated most of the Catholic Monarchies that had suppressed and expelled the Jesuits. Here’s a map of the First French Empire in 1812:


Napoleon and the Catholic Church

From Wikipedia:

In 1796, French Republican troops under the command of Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Italy, defeated the papal troops and occupied Ancona and Loreto.

Pope Pius VI sued for peace, which was granted at Tolentino on February 19, 1797; but on December 28 of that year, in a riot blamed by Papal forces on Italian and French revolutionaries, the popular brigadier-general Mathurin-Léonard Duphot, who had gone to Rome with Joseph Bonaparte as part of the French embassy, was killed and a new pretext was furnished for invasion. General Berthier marched to Rome, entered it unopposed on February 10, 1798, and, proclaiming a Roman Republic, demanded of the Pope the renunciation of his temporal power.

Upon his refusal he was taken prisoner, and on February 20 was escorted from the Vatican to Siena, and thence to the Certosa near Florence. The French declaration of war against Tuscany led to his removal (he was escorted by the Spaniard Pedro Gómez Labrador, Marquis of Labrador) by way of Parma, Piacenza, Turin and Grenoble to the citadel of Valence, the chief town of Drôme where he died six weeks after his arrival, on August 29, 1799, having then reigned longer than any Pope.

Pius VI’s body was embalmed, but was not buried until January 30, 1800 after Napoleon saw political advantage to burying the deceased Pope in efforts to bring the Catholic Church back into France.

Napoleon realized the importance of religion as a means to increase obedience and his control over the French. It was not until the conclave of Cardinals had gathered to elect a new Pope that Napoleon decided to bury Pope Pius VI who had died several weeks earlier. He gave him a gaudy ceremony in an effort to gain the attention of the Catholic Church. This eventually led to the Concordat of 1801 negotiated by Ercole Consalvi, the Pope’s secretary of state, which re-systemised the linkage between the French church and Rome. However, the Concordat also contained the “Organic Articles” which Consalvi had fiercely denied Napoleon, but which the latter had installed regardless.

The papacy had suffered a major loss of church lands through secularizations in the Holy Roman Empire following the Peace of Lunéville (1801), when a number of German princes were compensated for their losses by the seizure of ecclesiastical property.

The Concordat of 1801 is a reflection of an agreement between Napoleon Bonaparte and Pope Pius VII that reaffirmed the Roman Catholic Church as the majority church of France and restored some of its civil status.

While the Concordat restored some ties to the papacy, it was largely in favor of the state; the balance of church-state relations had tilted firmly in Napoleon Bonaparte’s favour. As a part of the Concordat, he presented another set of laws called the Organic Articles.

From the beginning of his papacy to the fall of Napoleon I Bonaparte in 1815, Pius VII was completely involved with France. He and Napoleon were continually in conflict, often involving the French military leader’s wishes for concessions to his demands.

Relations between the Church and Napoleon deteriorated. On February 3, 1808, General Miollis occupied Rome with a division. In the next month, the puppet Kingdom of Italy annexed the papal provinces Ancona, Macerata, Fermo, and Urbino, and diplomatic relations were broken off.

On 17 May 1809, Napoleon issued two decrees from the Schönbrunn Palace near Vienna in which he reproached the popes for the ill use they had made of the donation of Charlemagne, his “august predecessor”, and declared those territories which were still under the direct control of the Papal State were to be annexed to the French empire. The territories were to be organized under Miollis with a council extraordinary to administer them. As compensation the Pope would receive a stipend of 2,000,000 francs per annum. On 10 June Miollis had the Pontifical flag, which still floated over the castle of St. Angelo, lowered.

When Pius VII subsequently excommunicated Napoleon, one of Napoleon’s officers saw an opportunity to gain praise. Although Napoleon had captured Castel Sant’Angelo and intimidated the Pope by pointing cannons at his papal bedroom, he did not instruct one of his most ambitious lieutenants, Lieutenant Radet, to kidnap the Pope. Yet once Pius VII was a prisoner, Napoleon did not offer his release; the Pope was moved throughout Napoleon’s territories, in great sickness at times, though most of his confinement took place at Savona. Napoleon sent several delegations of his supporters to pressure the Pope on various issues: yielding power; and signing a new concordat with France.

The Pope remained in confinement for over six years, and did not return to Rome until May 24, 1814, when the 5th Radetzky Hussars of the Allied forces freed the Pope during a pursuit of Napoleonic forces.

At the Congress of Vienna (1814–1815) the Papal States were largely restored. The Jesuits were restored. The Pope offered a refuge in his capital to the members of the Bonaparte family. Princess Letitia, the deposed emperor’s mother, lived there; likewise did his brothers Lucien and Louis and his uncle, Cardinal Fesch.

In February 1821, while exiled at Saint Helena island, Napoleon’s health began to deteriorate rapidly. He reconciled with the Catholic Church. He died on 5 May 1821, after receiving the Sacraments of Confession, Extreme Unction and Viaticum in the presence of Father Ange Vignali.

Yes, after all this, the Jesuits, having been suppressed by all these Catholic Monarchies in the latter part of the 1700s and by Pope Clement XIV in 1773 with the brief Dominus ac Redemptor, were officially restored by Pope Pius VII who had been bulldozed by Napoleon throughout his Papacy. And after that the Jesuits soon took over the Vatican which they have secretly ruled ever since.

It’s interesting that Napoleon then indeed reconciled with the Catholic Church before his death in 1821;

The news the pope had received that Napoleon wanted to be reconciled to the Church was true. The dreary life he led on St. Helena gave him time to turn his mind to God. He once commented to a young doctor who laughed at his growing devotion to religion, “Young man! You are perhaps too clever to believe in God; I am not so advanced as that. Not all can be atheists.” The will he wrote on St. Helena opened with strange words for a man who, most of his life, had called himself a Deist: “I die in the bosom of the Apostolic and Roman Church.” In his will, Napoleon said he wanted to be buried according to the rites of the Catholic Church.

But what’s even more interesting is that the founder of the Illuminati Adam Weishaupt, who supposedly was an ardent adversary of the Catholic Church, did the same:

As early as 16 February, 1785, Weishaupt had fled from Ingolstadt, and in 1787 he settled at Gotha. His numerous apologetic writings failed to exonerate either the order or himself. Being now the head of a numerous family, his views on religious and political matters grew more sober. After 1787 he renounced all active connexion with secret societies, and again drew near to the Church, displaying remarkable zeal in the building of the Catholic church at Gotha. He died on 18 November, 1830, “reconciled with the Catholic Church, which, as a youthful professor, he had doomed to death and destruction”—as the chronicle of the Catholic parish in Gotha relates.

This certainly fits in with the theory that Weishaupt had been a secret Jesuit all the time, that he was a frontman for the Jesuits during their suppression in the Catholic kingdoms.

And was it just a coincidence that the French Revolution abolished the French Monarchy which had dissolved the Jesuit order; that Napoleon lambasted other Catholic Monarchies that had done the same, and the Papacy that had officially suppressed them in 1773; and that after all the turmoil, the Jesuits arguably came out as the biggest winners?