Does our Current Pope Support World Goverment? (continued)


topic continued from here:

Hi everyone.
Very interesting topic raised here.
I Pray that more people would read this thread and research a little more on the subject. :slight_smile:

I’m a practicing young Catholic whose slowly awaking to these very dangerous secret/elite/nwo groups and how in stealth, they affect our precious lives on earth.

I myself used to laugh at people who would bring up these so called conspiracy theories and attempt to debate them. So i can understand most peoples reaction when its brought up. Most people have trouble defining whose really the evil doers in our times.
But i thank God for allowing me to see behind the well slicked packaging, that is the mainstream media/music/movies etc in seeing who really sets the agenda and what they promote. Evil!

I found this article by doing a quick google search which seems neutral, briefly explaining whats happening to our beloved Catholic Church with regards to elite/nwo groups.

One sentence reads "The Catholic Church is attempting to fight two wars; the first is against the New World Order, and the second is a public relations war. Discrediting and dividing the Church will be one more war that helps the New World Order."
Would like peoples opinion on this article.

Also just incase your not aware, Pope Leo XIII wrote an Encyclical/Report on freemasonry (secret groups)

Has anyone got any information regarding the Catholic Church confronting elite/secret/nwo groups? :confused:

God Bless


I’ve recently found this book called “The Gospel Confronting World Disorder” where our current Pope has made comments opposing the new world order. What a relief! :thumbsup:
You can buy it here:
Does any know where in Australia i can buy it?

Preface in full:

From the very beginning of the Enlightenment, belief in progress has always set Christian eschatology aside and eventually replaced it entirely. Happiness is no longer anticipated in the afterlife but rather in this world. The attitude of Albert Camus, who resolutely opposes to Christ?s words “my kingdom” is not of this world, his affirmation that “my kingdom is of this world,” is emblematic of modern man?s disposition… If in the last century belief in progress was still a generic optimism that anticipated progressive betterment of the world’s condition and an ever closer approach of a kind of paradise from the triumphant march of the sciences, such faith in our century has taken on a political turn.

On the one hand, there have been systems of Marxist orientation that promised the attainment of the desired reign of man by way of their ideologically-driven politics; an attempt that obviously failed. On the other hand, efforts to build the future have been made by attempts that draw more or less profoundly from the source of liberal traditions. Under the title New World Order, these efforts take on a configuration; they increasingly relate to the UN and its international conferences, especially those of Cairo and Beijing that transparently reveal a philosophy of the new man and of the new world, as they endeavor to map out the ways of reaching them.

Such a philosophy is no longer utopian, in the sense of a Marxist dream. On the contrary, it is very realistic: it determines the limits of the well-being sought from limited means for attaining it. This philosophy recommends, for example, without seeking to justify itself, not worrying about taking care of those who are no longer productive nor have any hope of a quality life. Furthermore, it no longer expects that people, used to riches and well being, be ready to make requisite sacrifices, on the contrary, it recommends ways of reducing the number of participants at humanity?s table, so that at least the so called happiness, already acquired by some, will not be touched. The typical character of this new anthropology, which is at the basis of the New World Order, is revealed above all in the image of woman, in the ideology of “Women’s empowerment,” proposed at Beijing. The goal is the self-realization of women for whom the principle obstacles are the family and maternity. Thus woman must be liberated above all from what characterizes her and very simply makes for her specificity: this must disappear before “Gender, fairness and equality,” before an indistinct and uniform human being, in whose life sexuality had no other meaning than as a voluptuous drug that can be used in any manner conceivable.

In the fear of maternity that gripped a great number of our contemporaries, there is something more profound at play. The other person is always, in the end, a competitor who takes away part of my life, a menace to my Ego and my free development. Today we no longer have a “philosophy of love,” but only a “philosophy of egotism.” The notion that I can enrich myself simply in the gift that I can find beginning with the other and through my being-for-another — all that is rejected as an idealistic illusion. But it is precisely there that man is deceived. In effect, when he is advised against loving, he is actually counseled not to be man.

And so, at the stage of the present development of a new image of a new world, we reach the point where the Christian —not only him but especially him—is obliged to protest. We must thank Michel Schooyans for having, in this book, given energetic voice to the protest needed. He shows us how the idea of man?s rights that characterize the modern epoch, which is so important and positive in many ways, suffers right at the very beginning from the fact that it is founded on man alone and therefore on his ability and his will to carry out the general recognition of these rights. If, from the start, the reflection of the luminous Christian image of man protected the universality of rights, new questions arise to the degree that this image becomes blurred. How will the rights of the humblest be respected and promoted when our conception of man so often is based, as our author says, “on jealousy, anxiety, fear and even hate? How can an ideology, that recommends sterilization, abortion, systematic contraception and even euthanasia as the price of an unbridled pansexualism, bring men to the joy of living and loving?” (CH 6)

It is here that we clearly find that the Christian has something positive to offer in the struggle for future history. In effect, it is not sufficient that he opposes eschatology to the ideology of “postmodern” constructions of the future, Certainly he must do this and do this resolutely. But our voice has become all too feeble and timid in this regard over the last decades. In fact, in his earthly life mans is but a straw without meaning if our gaze is turned away from eternal life. The same thing holds true for history as a whole. In this sense, reference to eternal life, if it’s made correctly, never has the character of a flight. It simply gives to earthly existence its responsibility, its grandeur, its dignity. But precisely these repercussions on the “intermundane” must be articulated. It is certain that history much never be simply reduced to silence: one cannot, it is not allowed, reduce liberty to silence. That is the illusion of the utopians.

We cannot impose on tomorrows models, which will then be yesterday’s models. Nevertheless, we must plan the proposals for a path to the future, proposals for generally overcoming the new historical challenges. That is what Michel Schooyans does in the second and third parts of his book. Above all, he proposes, in contrast to the new anthropology, the essential traits of the Christian image of man and then applies them in a concrete way to the big problems of the future world. (especially Chapters 10-12) He thus gives a concrete and politically realistic and realizable content to the idea of a “civilization of love,” so often expressed by John Paul II.

Michel Schooyans’ book thus goes to the heart of the great challenges to our historic moment with vivacity and great competence. We hope that it will be read by people with varying orientations, that it will stir up lively discussion and thus contribute to prepare the future models worthy of the greatness of man, as well as insure the dignity of those who are unable to defend themselves

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Rome, April 25, 1997


The Pope does NOT advocate or support a World Government. End of story!! Do we have to have another thread on this so soon after the other.



Thanks for your reply. :slight_smile:
I Pray and hope we can get some real answers here.

I’m trying hard to find information, articles, books etc regarding recent Popes condemning the new world order.
Can anyone please help :confused:

There are many good practicing Catholics out there slowly asking the question "why haven’t any recent Popes/Leaders spoken out against the real evil groups/organisations/individuals that are undermining us Catholics and the rest of the world?

We all need to ask the tough questions and then trust in Jesus to help us seek the truth. For example:
"which groups/ individuals does satan use to weaken us and to twist the arms of our leaders? Who funds these evil groups/ individuals like the mainstream media, hollywood, music industry, pornography etc??

Let’s start with the UN. Is the UN an evil organisation or not :confused:
Good and bad points about the UN.

God Bless


Sadly, we probably do, just as we need endless threads saying that Catholics don’t worship Mary: the anti-Catholic propaganda gets repeated so often that it’s worth repeating the truth in return.

I can’t tell you how many people I’ve encountered who accept it as known fact that the Catholic Church ‘wants to combine all religions into one’ like something out of a “Left Behind” book. And any time the pope is photographed standing next to a member of a different religion, they start saying, “See? How can two walk together unless they be agreed?” So it’s worth stating the obvious from time to time.


Hi Gamera

Thanks for your input. :slight_smile:

Gamera i’m still on the fence on this topic.
But i’m trying really hard to find articles, information to counter people who say Popes after Vatican 2 have allied with the NWO.

There is plenty of evidence that a NWO is being put in place very quickly but not much information about recent Catholic leaders opposing it :confused:

So Gamera, are you denying the existence of elitists individuals/groups working together to control the population and the way we think:confused:

Just look at the garbage on tv these days. Whose pushing all this you must ask yourself:confused:

God Bless


Wake up and smell the coffee!!

The Pope does NOT advocate or support a world government. How can anyone be so stupid as to even think such a thing?


mmmm coffee, would love some thanks :smiley:

Thistle i sense that also BUT i’m trying to find articles, information, evidence regarding recent Popes opposing the NWO.
Can you please help us??

You believe theres a NWO working against the Church don’t you??

If not heres some info i just recently found by Fra John Carlo Rosales from EWTN.

(below is some paragraphs taken from the link)

Intermediate goals of the Movement

Although the New Age Movement's ultimate goal is world domination, there are 

numerous intermediate goals of a political, social, and economic nature. These include
the following:
- a universal credit card system;
- a world food authority which would control the world’s food supply;
-a a universal tax;
-a a universal draft, in spite of the Movement’s pacifist ideas. After the
Movement presented itself to the public in 1975, further details came forth:
-the establishment of a world economic system;
- the replacement of private ownership of credit, transport and staple production
with ownership by a world directorate;
- the recognition of biological controls on a worldwide basis of population and
- a minimum standard of freedom and welfare throughout the world;
- a duty of subordinating personal life to that of a world directorate.
Professing peace and love, the Movement has succeeded in blinding many of its
adherents to its real goals and deceiving them in supporting the following:
-Aryanisim, i.e., the domination of the Western races; as with Hitler, this is
linked with anti-Semitism;
- mass planetary initiation, also called "Luciferic initiation,"i.e., an act of
consecration to Lucifer.
- cleansing action, i.e., the extermination of all those who disagree with the
Movement’s goals;
- abortion and artificial insemination;
- forced limitation of family size;
- genetic control;
- death control, whereby a cult is made of death, which is regarded as a
euphoric experience and the transition to continuously new life cycles.[26]

An assessment and critique
The New Age Movement has already done much toward corrupting morality, in
our Christian sense, by creating its own values incompatible with Catholic Christianity.
At the outset it is difficult for ordinary persons, or even professionals, to recognize the
hidden agenda of this Movement because it is presented so nicely and so humanely and
with so much concern for the environment that it appeals to common sense to partake
in such a common concern. But in all their plans, as listed above for the New World
order, there is no due place for God. It is all humanistic and ecological.

Any comments???

God Bless


It sounds like you spend most of your time thinking about conspiracy theories. Focus on your faith and forget the fantasies!
I repeat: The Pope does NOT advocate or support a world government.


By the simple fact that he has called for a NWO.



This is my exact point. You took your valuable time and wrote that whole response to Thistle. He won’t even address the important facts that you have brought up. He won’t address any of it. You cannot talk sense to someone in complete and total denial. When someone is close minded, and won’t even research the issues you brought up. It is best to move on to those who will join you in good conversation.

He calls these issues “fantasies” as if you lay in your bed hoping the New Age Movement could be true. When in reality all one has to do is research this topic. People have written books on the New Age Movement. It is real and it is happening. I guess for some though… Ignorance is Bliss.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

and it was Mickey Mouse who killed J.F.K!!

closed #14

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit