Secret Societies and Their Power in The 20th Century - 4

Secret Societies and Their Power in The 20th Century - 4

CHAPTER 16
THE BLACK NOBILITY

Before going any further into the “big picture” we have to take a little detour again to make things a bit clearer.

For the following information I have to thank Ex- MI6 agent Dr. John Coleman for his tremendous research. He is the only one who ever wrote anything in English on the “Black Nobility”, and on the American continent he is a pioneer in this research. I met Dr. Coleman personally and tell you that he is sincere in his intention (I have my own personal faculty to “read” or “check” people). But he sure is holding back information, as I do, too, because we don’t want to lose our heads.

Dr. Coleman tells us about a term you won’t find in any ordinary book or dictionary: “The Black Nobility”. These are the oligarchic families of Venice and Genoa who in the 12th century held the privileged trading rights (monopolies).

Dr. Coleman:

“The first of three crusades, from 1063 to 1123, established the power of the Venetian Black Nobility and solidified the power of the wealthy ruling class. The Black Nobility aristocracy achieved complete control over Venice in 1171, when the appointment of the doge was transferred to what was known as the Great Council, which consisted of members of the commercial aristocracy, a complete triumph for them. Venice has remained in their hands ever since, but the power and influence of the Venetian Black Nobility extends far beyond its borders, and today, in 1986, is felt in every corner of the globe. In 1204 the oligarchic family parceled out feudal enclaves to their members, and from this epoch dates the great building-up of power and pressure until the government became a closed corporation of the leading Black Nobility families.”

The Black Nobility earned its title through dirty tricks, so when the population revolted against the monopolies in government, as anywhere else, the leaders of the uprising were quickly seized and brutally hanged. They use secret assassinations, murder, the bankrupting of opposing citizens or companies, kidnapping and rape. So, who are these families?

The most important ones are:

• House of Guelph (Britain)
• House of Wettin (Belgium)
• House of Bernadotte (Sweden)
• House of Liechtenstein (Liechtenstein)
• House of Oldenburg (Denmark)
• House of Hohenzollern (Germany)
• House of Hanover (Germany)
• House of Bourbon (France)
• House of Orange (Netherlands)
• House of Grimaldi (Monaco)
• House of Wittelsbach (Germany)
• House of Braganza (Portugal)
• House of Nassau (Luxembourg)
• House of Habsburg (Austria)
• House of Savoy (Italy)
• House of Karadjordjevic (Yugoslavia)
• House of Wurttemberg (Germany)
• House of Zogu (Albania)

As well as the ones you will find on the Family Tree of the Windsors. (Black Nobility Unmasked Worldwide, Dr. John Coleman, 1985)

All the families listed are connected with the House of Guelph, one of the original Black Nobility families of Venice from which the House of Windsor and thus the present Queen of England, Elisabeth II, descends.

The Guelphs are so intertwined with the German aristocracy through the House of Hanover that it would take several pages to mention all their connections. As you can see in this family tree, almost all European royal houses originate from the House of Hanover and thus from the House of Guelph – the Black Nobility. The Hanoverian English King George I came from the Duchy of Lunenberg, a part of Northern Germany, which had been governed by the Guelph family since the 12th century.

Today the Guelphs rule by dominating the raw materials market, and for years they have fixed the price of gold, a commodity they do neither produce nor own. The House of Windsor also controls the price of copper, zinc, lead and tin. And as you will see, it is no accident that the principle commodity exchanges are located in London. Companies run by Black Nobility families are British Petroleum, Oppenheimer, Lonrho, Philbro and others.

Another Black Nobility family are the Grosvenors in England. For centuries this family lived - as most of the European royal families – on ground rent. Today the family owns at least 300 acres of land in the center of London. The land is never sold, but leased on a 39 year leasehold agreement – the ground rent of the middle ages.

Grosvenor Square, in which the American Embassy is located, belongs to the Grosvenor family, as does Eaton Square. In Eaton Square apartments are rented out at 25,000 pounds a month, and that does not include maintenance costs. This will give you some idea of the immense wealth the Black Nobility families garner from ground rents, and why families like the Windsors are not at all interested in industrial progress along with the excess population it supports. This is the only reason why these “noble” families are behind most, if not all, of the wrong-headed Pro-environmental movements of the world that ultimately and covertly aim to curb population growth.

Prince Philip and Prince Charles are the most visible symbols of these movements and both have often spoken with the utmost callousness about the need to rid the world of unwanted people. (Black Nobility Unmasked Worldwide, Dr. John Coleman). So why do l mention the Black Nobility?

Because they are the founders of THE secret society of our day from which all the others are connected to the Illuminati originated from – the “Committee of 300”. As I will show you, the Club of Rome, the CFR, the RIIA, the Bilderbergers, the UN, the Round Table… all originate from the “Committee of 300” and therefore from the European Black Nobility families.
Well, here comes the most important point. Dr. Coleman has been perfectly right up to here.

He thinks that the European Black Nobility is the cause of all that is wrong. But, since at least the 17th century absolutely every European royal house has been infiltrated by JEWS. The House of Hanover seems to be German, but it is Jewish. So is the House of Habsburg.

So it wasn’t really the Germans who took over the British throne. Brilliant, isn’t it? (Sources: “Semi Goter” by Phillip Stauff and “Judenblut im deutshen Adel” - Jewish Blood in German Nobility by Otto Furst von Batailler)

Co-operating with the European Black Nobility are American families like the Harrimans and the McGeorge Bundys.
 

Back to Contents

Ancient History of The Black Nobility

Ancient  History of The Black Nobility

from BibleBelievers Website In Carthage, the Canaanites called themselves Punics. Rome attacked Carthage in full force, beginning in 264BC and completed their task after killing or enslaving every Carthaginian, by sowing the land to salt so that nothing could ever grow there again. The Edomites descended from Esau later intermarried with the Turks to produce a Turco-Edomite mixture which later became known as Chazars (Khazars) - who are the present occupants of Israel. These Canaanites eventually adopted the name "Sepharvaim" for deceptive purposes. They later became known as Venetians, and by marrying into European royalty and aristocracy, the "black nobility." The Venetians today control the Federal Reserve system in the US. Around AD1400, European power centers coalesced into two camps: the Ghibellines, who supported the Emperors Hohenstaufen family the Guelphs, from Welf, the German prince who competed with Frederick for control of the Holy Roman Empire The Pope allied himself with the Guelphs. All modern history stems directly from the struggle between these two powers. The Guelphs are also called the Neri, Black Guelphs, or Black Nobility, and supported William of Orange in his seizure of the throne of England, which eventually resulted in the formation of the Bank of England and the East India Company, which would rule the world from the 17th century. All coup d’etats, revolutions and wars in the 19th and 20th centuries are centered in the battle of the Guelphs to hold and enhance their power, which is now the New World Order. The power of the Guelphs would extend through the Italian financial centers to the north of France in Lombardy (all Italian bankers were referred to as "Lombards"). Lombard in German means "deposit bank", and the Lombards were bankers to the entire Medieval world. They would later transfer operations north to Hamburg, then to Amsterdam and finally to London. The Guelphs would start the slave trade to the colonies. The Guelphs, in order to aid their control of finance and politics, would perpetuate gnostic cults which eventually developed into the Rosicrucians, Unitarians, Fabian Society and the World Council of Churches. The East India company, together with John Stuart Mill, would finance the University of London. A friend of Mill, historian George Grote, a founder of London University donated £6000 for the study of "mental health", which began the worldwide "mental health" movement. Banks large and small in the thousands are in the Committee of 300 network, including: Banca Commerciale d’Italia Banca Privata Banco Ambrosiano The Netherlands Bank Barclays Bank Banco de Colombia Banco de Ibero-America Of special interest is Banca del la Svizzeria Italiana (BSI) - since it handles flight capital investments to and from the United States - primarily in dollars and US bonds - located and isolated in "neutral" Lugano, the flight capital center for the Venetian Black Nobility. Lugano is not in Italy or in Switzerland, and is a kind of twilight zone for shady flight capital operations. George Ball, who owns a large block of stock in BSI, is a prominent "insider" and the bank’s US representative. In the secret 1822 Treaty of Verona (between Austria, France, Prussia and Russia) the Jesuits agreed to smash the US Constitution and suppress the freedom of the US. Their methods included destroying free speech, destroying and suppressing the press, universal censorship, sustaining the cooperation of the Pope and clergy to use religion to help keep nations in passive obedience and financing wars against countries with representative governments. The monarchs who signed this treaty were ultimately deposed. Most of these families are very wealthy and may be more powerful today than when they sat upon thrones. They are known collectively as the Black Nobility. Privately these families refuse to recognize any right to rule except their own. The fact that this treaty was made long ago does not mean it is void. The treaty was placed in the Congressional Record on April 25, 1916 by Senator Owen. In 1948 George H.W. Bush graduated from Yale University and the Skull and Bones. He is a distant cousin of the Queen of England, part of the Black Nobility which traces its power back 5,000 years. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands created a group that became known as the Bilderbergers. Many "conservative" researchers have come to recognize the Bilderbergers as an important force for the "New World Order." (Note: Since the Bildebergers, according to former British Intelligence agent John Coleman, serve as a BINDING force between the three major ’one world government’ forces - the Wicca-Masons (i.e. Communism); the Black Nobility descendants of the early Roman emperors; and the Maltese Jesuits... each of which have 13 respective representatives on the 39-member Bildeberger board - and since a Nazi SS stormtrooper was responsible for developing this "New World Order" coordination council, and since Adolph Hitler’s second book was titled [believe it or not] "The New World Order." No wonder Adolph Hitler’s dream - and that of his predecessors the "Kaisers", a German translation of "Caesars" - was the revival of the Roman empire). According to former British Intelligence agent Dr. John Coleman, the three world power groups: the Wicca-Masons (i.e. Communism), the Maltese-Jesuits and the Black-Nobility (’Black’ in this context refers to their character, not their skin color) all work for and under the central Command of the Bavarian Illuminati which binds them together. The Bavarians created the Bilderberg society for this purpose, the core of which is a council of 13 members from each of the three ’groups’ or 39 in all. The old-line ruling families who believe that they have the right to rule the world because they are descended from the emperors of the ancient Roman and so-called ’holy’ Roman Empires consist of 13-15 ’blue blood’ families. Which include: Rothschild Kuhn Loeb Lehman Rockefeller Sach Warburg Lazard Seaf Goldman Schiff Morgan Schroeder Bush Harriman Others that have not been mentioned are more ’powerful’ than others. But these names will get you started if you wish to track down the present-day inner core of the conspiracy. The history of the Bilderberg group itself, a cover for the Bavarian Illuminati, and its Nazi connections, would probably be the best place to start. Prominent on the board of two insurance giants are Committee of 300 members: the Giustiniani family, Black Nobility of Rome and Venice who trace their lineage to the Emperor Justianian Sir Jocelyn Hambro of Hambros (Merchant) Bank Pierpaolo Luzzatti Fequiz, whose lineage dates back six centuries to the most ancient Luzzatos, the Black Nobility of Venice Umberto Ortolani of the ancient Black Nobility family of the same name Other old Venetian Black Nobility Committee of 300 members and board members of ASG and RAS are: the Doria family, the financiers of the Spanish Hapsburgs Elie de Rothschild of the French Rothschild family Baron August von Finck (Finck, the second richest man in Germany now deceased) Franco Orsini Bonacassi of the ancient Orsini Black Nobility that traces its lineage to an ancient Roman senator of the same name the Alba family whose lineage dates back to the great Duke of Alba Baron Pierre Lambert, a cousin of the Belgian Rothschild family Italy was chosen as a test-target by the Committee of 300. Italy is important to the conspirators’ plans because it is the closest European country to the Middle East, and linked to Middle East economics and politics. It is also the home of the Catholic Church, which Weishaupt ordered destroyed, and home for some of Europe’s most powerful oligarchical families of the ancient Black Nobility. Should Italy have been weakened by Aldo Moro’s death, it would have had repercussions in the Middle East which would have weakened US influence in the region. Italy is important for another reason; it is a gateway for drugs entering Europe from Iran and Lebanon. Various groups combined under the name of socialism to bring about the downfall of several Italian governments since the Club of Rome was established in 1968. Among these are the Black Nobility of Venice and Genoa, P2 Masonry and the Red Brigades, all working for the same goals. Police investigators in Rome working on the Red Brigades-Aldo Moro case came across the names of several very prominent Italian families working closely with this terrorist group. The police also discovered evidence that in at least a dozen cases, these powerful and prominent families had allowed their homes and/or property to be used as safe houses for Red Brigades cells. Peccei headed the Atlantic Institute’s Economic Council for three decades while he was the Chief Executive Officer for Giovanni Agnellis’ Fiat Motor Company. Agnelli, a member of an ancient Italian Black Nobility family of the same name, was one of the most important members of the Committee of 300. He played a leading role in development projects in the Soviet Union. The Club of Rome is a conspiratorial umbrella organization, a marriage between Anglo-American financiers and the old Black Nobility families of Europe, particularly the so-called "nobility" of London, Venice and Genoa. The key to the successful control of the world is their ability to create and manage savage economic recessions and eventual depressions. The Committee of 300 looks to social convulsions on a global scale, followed by depressions, as a softening-up technique for bigger things to come, as its principal method of creating masses of people all over the world who will become its "welfare" recipients of the future. To introduce new cults and continue to boost those already functioning which includes rock "music" gangsters such as the filthy, degenerate Mick Jagger’s "Rolling Stones" (a gangster group much favored by European Black Nobility) and all of the Tavistock-created "rock" groups which began with "The Beatles." To continue to build up the cult of Christian fundamentalism begun by the British East India Company’s servant, Darby, which will be misused to strengthen the Zionist state of Israel through identifying with the Jews through the myth of "God’s Chosen People" and by donating very substantial amounts of money to what they mistakenly believe is a religious cause in the furtherance of Christianity. Brzezinski was not writing as a private citizen but as Carter’s National Security Advisor and a leading member of the Club of Rome and a member of the Committee of 300, a member of the CFR and as a member of the old Polish Black Nobility. His book explains how America must leave its industrial base behind and enter into what he called "a distinct new historical era." In this regard a French Black Nobility member, Etienne D’Avignon, as a member of the Committee of 300, was assigned the task of collapsing the steel industry in the US It is doubtful that any of the hundreds of thousands of steel workers and shipyard workers who have been without jobs for the past decade have ever heard of D’Avignon. A second assassination bureau is located in Switzerland and was until recently run by a shadowy figure of whom no photographs existed after 1941. The operations were and probably still are financed by the Oltramaire family - Swiss Black Nobility, owners of the Lombard Odier Bank of Geneva, a Committee of 300 operation. The primary contact man was Jacques Soustelle - this according to US Army-G2 intelligence files. This group was also closely allied with Allen Dulles and Jean de Menil, an important member of the Committee of 300 and a very prominent name in the oil industry in Texas. Army-G2 records show that the group was heavily involved in the arms trade in the Middle East, but more than that, the assassination bureau made no less than 30 attempts to kill General de Gaulle, in which Jacques Soustelle was directly involved. The same Soustelle was the contact man for the Sendero Luminoso-Shining Pathway guerilla group protecting the Committee’s Peruvian cocaine producers. Richard Gardner was sent to Rome on a special assignment. Gardner married into one of the oldest Black Nobility families of Venice, thus providing the Venetian aristocracy a direct line to the White House. The late Averill Harriman was another of the committee’s direct links with the Kremlin and the White House, a position inherited by Kissinger after Harriman’s death. In 1986 in "The Order of St. John of Jerusalem" Dr. Coleman wrote: "It is therefore not a secret society, except where its purposes have been perverted in the inner councils like the Order of the Garter, which is a prostituted oligarchical creation of the British royal family, which makes a mockery of what the Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem stands for. As an example, we find the atheist Lord Peter Carrington, who pretends to be an Anglican Christian but who is a member of the Order of Osiris and other demonic sects, including Freemasonry, installed as a Knight of the Garter at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle, by Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II of England, of the Black Nobility Guelphs, also head of the Anglican Church, which she thoroughly despises." $15.8 billion is one realistic estimate of the Queen’s worth - tax exempt - BOE. "Only the little people pay taxes." Leona Helmsly Return to the Black Nobility

1950 Catholic Dictionary | CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA | entry in each: Devil

All angels are pure spirits. But the Devil (chief of the fallen angels) and the fallen angels who followed the Devil at his self willed fall are evil (Apoc. ), Our Lord Jesus Christ said so, especially to the Jews who persecuted Him (see John 8:44 The father from whom you are is the devil, and the desires of your father it is your will to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has not stood in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie he speaks from his very nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. CCD Translation from the mid 1940's of the Vulgate with Original Greek comparison.); that ends any debate before it starts. The proper theological manner in which to refer to all of and any of the fallen angels, beginning with the Devil, is as preternatural spirits - NOT spiritual in any sense that implies holiness - FOR THEY HAVE NO HOLINESS IN THEM OR ABOUT THEM and NEVER WILL HAVE ANY HOLINESS. Holiness is reserved to God the Holy Trinity, Adorable Unity, and His faithful angels and the saints. Paganism has no holiness either. All the gods and goddesses of paganism ancient and modern, and that includes Hinduism and Buddhism and Arabic magic and American Indian Shamanism and all the rest, are evil; they are Devils and demons and nothing else.

Exodus 20:1 And the Lord spoke all these words: 2 I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.

1 John 5:
v. 16... there is a sin unto death; I do not mean that anyone should ask [forgiveness] as to that. {The primary meaning here has nothing to do with mortal and venial sins proposed by the scholastics centuries later. It means what it says, you may NOT ask forgiveness for those who continue in that. See verse 21 for what that is.}
v. 21 Dear children guard yourselves from the idols [which is the sin unto death, damnation, the word "idols" in Greek: εἰδωλων, indicates all εἰδωλολατρεία - idololatreia, which means any and all worship associated in any manner, shape or form with idols and the false gods/goddesses behind them, all of their associated prayers, the Assisi abominations of the Jew Woytyla-jp2, et al - this applies to ALL of paganism ancient and modern - period.].

THERE IS NO HOLINESS IN PAGANISM ONLY DAMNATION.

Concerning holiness and salvation see: Hebrews 12:14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness: without which no man shall see God.


From the 1950 Catholic Dictionary page 65f

CATHOLIC DICTIONARY

The Catholic Press, Inc.CHICAGO: ILLINOIS
Imprimatur+ Samuel Cardinal StritchArchbishop of Chicago

Devil. 1. The name given to any of the fallen angels, who sinned before the creation of Adam and have been damned to hell. The devils did not lose all of their original greatness and power after their sin, and they use all their cunning now for evil. The common teaching is that their sin was one of pride. Suarez taught that it was a refusal to worship the word Incarnate when God revealed to them the Incarnation. All the gods of the Gentiles were devils. Men offered them sacrifices even of their own children (Ps.105:37; Bar. 4:7). This was specifically forbidden (Lev. 17 :7). They were driven out of possessed persons by Our Lord (Matt. 8:16,31 ; 9:33;17:17; Luke 4:35; 8:2,28; 9:43;13:11). They were subject to the disciples (Luke 10 :17; Acts 5:16 ;8:7; 16:18). They recognized Christ ( Matt. 8:29; Mark 3:11; 5:7 ; Luk e 4:33,41; 8:28; Acts 19:15). 2. The name given to the chief of the fallen angels, who is also called Satan ("the adversary"). Sin entered the world through his jealousy (Wis. 2:24). He is always seeking to injure men (Gen. 3:1; 2 Para!. 18:21 ;Job 1 :11; Zach. 3:1 ; Matt. 8:28 ; Luke 8:12; Eph. 6:11; Apoc. 2:10 ; 12:9) . He tempted Our Lord (Matt. 4). He transforms himself into an angel of light to deceive men (2 Cor. 11 :14). He can act on ly as God permits (3Kings 22:22; Job 1:12 ; 2:6; Matt. 8:31; 2 Tim. 2:26; Apoc. 20 :7 ). He is the father and prince of the world and of all the wicked (John 8:44; 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 ; Acts 13:10; 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:2; 1John 3 :10 ). His empire was destroyed by Christ (Matt. 8:16; Luke 10:18; 11:22; Col.1:13; 2 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 2:14).

_________________________________________________________________________________

Devil [From the Catholic encyclopedia 1907 - 1912, in the public domain]

The name commonly given to the fallen angels, who are also known as demons (see DEMONOLOGY). With the article (ho) it denotes Lucifer, their chief, as in Matthew 25:41, "the Devil and his angels".

It may be said of this name, as St. Gregory says of the word angel, "nomen est officii, non naturæ"--the designation of an office, not of a nature. For the Greek word (from diaballein, "to traduce") means a slanderer, or accuser, and in this sense it is applied to him of whom it is written "the accuser [ho kategoros] of our brethren is cast forth, who accused them before our God day and night" (Apocalypse 12:10). It thus answers to the Hebrew name Satan which signifies an adversary, or an accuser.

Mention is made of the Devil in many passages of the Old and New Testaments, but there is no full account given in any one place, and the Scripture teaching on this topic can only be ascertained by combining a number of scattered notices from Genesis to Apocalypse, and reading them in the light of patristic and theological tradition. The authoritative teaching of the Church on this topic is set forth in the decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (cap. i, "Firmiter credimus"), wherein, after saying that God in the beginning had created together two creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal, that is to say the angelic and the earthly, and lastly man, who was made of both spirit and body, the council continues:

"Diabolus enim et alii dæmones a Deo quidem naturâ creati sunt boni, sed ipsi per se facti sunt mali." ("the Devil and the other demons were created by God good in their nature but they by themselves have made themselves evil.")

Here it is clearly taught that the Devil and the other demons are spiritual or angelic creatures created by God in a state of innocence, and that they became evil by their own act. It is added that man sinned by the suggestion of the Devil, and that in the next world the wicked shall suffer perpetual punishment with the Devil. The doctrine which may thus be set forth in a few words has furnished a fruitful theme for theological speculation for the Fathers and Schoolmen, as well as later theologians, some of whom, Suarez for example, have treated it very fully. On the other hand it has also been the subject of many heretical or erroneous opinions, some of which owe their origin to pre-Christian systems of demonology. In later years Rationalist writers have rejected the doctrine altogether, and seek to show that it has been borrowed by Judaism and Christianity from external systems of religion wherein it was a natural development of primitive Animism.

As may be gathered from the language of the Lateran definition, the Devil and the other demons are but a part of the angelic creation, and their natural powers do not differ from those of the angels who remained faithful. Like the other angels, they are pure spiritual beings without any body, and in their original state they are endowed with supernatural grace and placed in a condition of probation. It was only by their fall that they became devils. This was before the sin of our first parents, since this sin itself is ascribed to the instigation of the Devil: "By the envy of the Devil, death came into the world" (Wisdom 2:24). Yet it is remarkable that for an account of the fall of the angels we must turn to the last book of the Bible. For as such we may regard the vision in the Apocalypse, albeit the picture of the past is blended with prophecies of what shall be in the future:

And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels: and they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world; and he was cast unto the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. (Apocalypse 12:7-9)

To this may be added the words of St. Jude: "And the angels who kept not their principality, but forsook their own habitation, he hath reserved under darkness in everlasting chains, unto the judgment of the great day" (Jude 1:6; cf. 2 Peter 2:4).

In the Old Testament we have a brief reference to the Fall in Job 4:18: "In his angels he found wickedness". But to this must be added the two classic texts in the prophets:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations? And thou saidst in thy heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like the most High. But yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, into the depth of the pit. (Isaiah 14:12-15)

This parable of the prophet is expressly directed against the King of Babylon, but both the early Fathers and later Catholic commentators agree in understanding it as applying with deeper significance to the fall of the rebel angel. And the older commentators generally consider that this interpretation is confirmed by the words of Our Lord to his disciples: "I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven" (Luke 10:18). For these words were regarded as a rebuke to the disciples, who were thus warned of the danger of pride by being reminded of the fall of Lucifer. But modern commentators take this text in a different sense, and refer it not to the original fall of Satan, but his overthrow by the faith of the disciples, who cast out devils in the name of their Master. And this new interpretation, as Schanz observes, is more in keeping with the context.

The parallel prophetic passage is Ezekiel's lamentation upon the king of Tyre:

You were the seal of resemblance, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. You were in the pleasures of the paradise of God; every precious stone was thy covering; the sardius, the topaz, and the jasper, the chrysolite, and the onyx, and the beryl, the sapphire, and the carbuncle, and the emerald; gold the work of your beauty: and your pipes were prepared in the day that you were created. You a cherub stretched out, and protecting, and I set you in the holy mountain of God, you have walked in the midst of the stones of fire. You were perfect in your wave from the day of creation, until iniquity was found in you. (Ezekiel 28:12-15)

There is much in the context that can only be understood literally of an earthly king concerning whom the words are professedly spoken, but it is clear that in any case the king is likened to an angel in Paradise who is ruined by his own iniquity.

Even for those who in no way doubt or dispute it, the doctrine set forth in these texts and patristic interpretations may well suggest a multitude of questions, and theologians have not been loath to ask and answer them.

And in the first place what was the nature of the sin of the rebel angels? In any case this was a point presenting considerable difficulty, especially for theologians, who had formed a high estimate of the powers and possibilities of angelic knowledge, a subject which had a peculiar attraction for many of the great masters of scholastic speculation. For if sin be, as it surely is, the height of folly, the choice of darkness for light, of evil for good, it would seem that it can only be accounted for by some ignorance, or inadvertence, or weakness, or the influence of some overmastering passion. But most of these explanations seem to be precluded by the powers and perfections of the angelic nature. The weakness of the flesh, which accounts for such a mass of human wickedness, was altogether absent from the angels. There could be no place for carnal sin without the corpus delicti. And even some sins that are purely spiritual or intellectual seem to present an almost insuperable difficulty in the case of the angels.

This may certainly be said of the sin which by many of the best authorities is regarded as being actually the great offense of Lucifer, to wit, the desire of independence of God and equality with God. It is true that this seems to be asserted in the passage of Isaiah (14:13). And it is naturally suggested by the idea of rebellion against an earthly sovereign, wherein the chief of the rebels very commonly covets the kingly throne. At the same time the high rank which Lucifer is generally supposed to have held in the hierarchy of angels might seem to make this offense more likely in his case, for, as history shows, it is the subject who stands nearest the throne who is most open to temptations of ambition. But this analogy is not a little misleading. For the exaltation of the subject may bring his power so near that of his sovereign that he may well be able to assert his independence or to usurp the throne; and even where this is not actually the case he may at any rate contemplate the possibility of a successful rebellion. Moreover, the powers and dignities of an earthly prince may be compatible with much ignorance and folly. But it is obviously otherwise in the case of the angels. For, whatever gifts and powers may be conferred on the highest of the heavenly princes, he will still be removed by an infinite distance from the plenitude of God's power and majesty, so that a successful rebellion against that power or any equality with that majesty would be an absolute impossibility.

And what is more, the highest of the angels, by reason of their greater intellectual illumination, must have the clearest knowledge of this utter impossibility of attaining to equality with God. This difficulty is clearly put by the Disciple in St. Anselm's dialogue "De Casu Diaboli" (cap. iv); for the saint felt that the angelic intellect, at any rate, must see the force of the "ontological argument" (see ONTOLOGY). "If", he asks, "God cannot be thought of except as sole, and as of such an essence that nothing can be thought of like to Him [then] how could the Devil have wished for what could not be thought of? — He surely was not so dull of understanding as to be ignorant of the inconceivability of any other entity like to God" (Si Deus cogitari non potest, nisi ita solus, ut nihil illi simile cogitari possit, quomodo diabolus potuit velle quod non potuit cogitari? Non enim ita obtusæ mentis erat, ut nihil aliud simile Deo cogitari posse nesciret). The Devil, that is to say, was not so obtuse as not to know that it was impossible to conceive of anything like (i.e. equal) to God. And what he could not think he could not will.

St. Anselm's answer is that there need be no question of absolute equality; yet to will anything against the Divine will is to seek to have that independence which belongs to God alone, and in this respect to be equal to God. In the same sense St. Thomas (I:63:3) answers the question, whether the Devil desired to be "as God". If by this we mean equality with God, then the Devil could not desire it, since he knew this to be impossible, and he was not blinded by passion or evil habit so as to choose that which is impossible, as may happen with men. And even if it were possible for a creature to become God, an angel could not desire this, since, by becoming equal with God he would cease to be an angel, and no creature can desire its own destruction or an essential change in its being.

These arguments are combated by Scotus (In II lib. Sent., dist. vi, Q. i.), who distinguishes between efficacious volition and the volition of complaisance, and maintains that by the latter act an angel could desire that which is impossible. In the same way he urges that, though a creature cannot directly will its own destruction, it can do this consequenter, i.e. it can will something from which this would follow.

Although St. Thomas regards the desire of equality with God as something impossible, he teaches nevertheless (loc. cit.) that Satan sinned by desiring to be "as God", according to the passage in the prophet (Isaiah 14), and he understands this to mean likeness, not equality. But here again there is need of a distinction. For men and angels have a certain likeness to God in their natural perfections, which are but a reflection of his surpassing beauty, and yet a further likeness is given them by supernatural grace and glory. Was it either of these likenesses that the devil desired? And if it be so, how could it be a sin? For was not this the end for which men and angels were created? Certainly, as Thomas teaches, not every desire of likeness with God would be sinful, since all may rightly desire that manner of likeness which is appointed them by the will of their Creator. There is sin only where the desire is inordinate, as in seeking something contrary to the Divine will, or in seeking the appointed likeness in a wrong way. The sin of Satan in this matter may have consisted in desiring to attain supernatural beatitude by his natural powers or, what may seem yet stranger, in seeking his beatitude in the natural perfections and reflecting the supernatural. In either case, as St. Thomas considers, this first sin of Satan was the sin of pride. Scotus, however (loc. cit., Q. ii), teaches that this sin was not pride properly so called, but should rather be described as a species of spiritual lust.

Although nothing definite can be known as to the precise nature of the probation of the angels and the manner in which many of them fell, many theologians have conjectured, with some show of probability, that the mystery of the Divine Incarnation was revealed to them, that they saw that a nature lower than their own was to be hypostatically united to the Person of God the Son, and that all the hierarchy of heaven must bow in adoration before the majesty of the Incarnate Word; and this, it is supposed, was the occasion of the pride of Lucifer (cf. Suarez, De Angelis, lib. VII, xiii). As might be expected, the advocates of this view seek support in certain passages of Scripture, notably in the words of the Psalmist as they are cited in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore Him" (Hebrews 1:6; Psalm 96:7). And if the twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse may be taken to refer, at least in a secondary sense, to the original fall of the angels, it may seem somewhat significant that it opens with the vision of the Woman and her Child. But this interpretation is by no means certain, for the text in Hebrews 1, may be referred to the second coming of Christ, and much the same may be said of the passage in the Apocalypse.

It would seem that this account of the trial of the angels is more in accordance with what is known as the Scotist doctrine on the motives of the Incarnation than with the Thomist view, that the Incarnation was occasioned by the sin of our first parents. For since the sin itself was committed at the instigation of Satan, it presupposes the fall of the angels. How, then, could Satan's probation consist in the fore-knowledge of that which would, ex hypothesi, only come to pass in the event of his fall? In the same way it would seem that the aforesaid theory is incompatible with another opinion held by some old theologians, to wit, that men were created to fill up the gaps in the ranks of the angels. For this again supposes that if no angels had sinned no men would have been made, and in consequence there would have been no union of the Divine Person with a nature lower than the angels.

As might be expected from the attention they had bestowed on the question of the intellectual powers of the angels, the medieval theologians had much to say on the time of their probation. The angelic mind was conceived of as acting instantaneously, not, like the mind of man, passing by discursive reasoning from premises to conclusions. It was pure intelligence as distinguished from reason. Hence it would seem that there was no need of any extended trial. And in fact we find St. Thomas and Scotus discussing the question whether the whole course might not have been accomplished in the first instant in which the angels were created. The Angelic Doctor argues that the Fall could not have taken place in the first instant. And it certainly seems that if the creature came into being in the very act of sinning the sin itself might be said to come from the Creator. But this argument, together with many others, is answered with his accustomed acuteness by Scotus, who maintains the abstract possibility of sin in the first instant. But whether possible or not, it is agreed that this is not what actually happened. For the authority of the passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel, which were generally accepted as referring to the fall of Lucifer, might well suffice to show that for at least one instant he had existed in a state of innocence and brightness. To modern readers the notion that the sin was committed in the second instant of creation may seem scarcely less incredible than the possibility of a fall in the very first. But this may be partly due to the fact that we are really thinking of human modes of knowledge, and fail to take into account the Scholastic conception of angelic cognition. For a being who was capable of seeing many things at once, a single instant might be equivalent to the longer period needed by slowly-moving mortals.

This dispute, as to the time taken by the probation and fall of Satan, has a purely speculative interest. But the corresponding question as to the rapidity of the sentence and punishment is in some ways a more important matter. There can indeed be no doubt that Satan and his rebel angels were very speedily punished for their rebellion. This would seem to be sufficiently indicated in some of the texts which are understood to refer to the fall of the angels. It might be inferred, moreover, from the swiftness with which punishment followed on the offense in the case of our first parents, although man's mind moves more slowly than that of the angels, and he had more excuse in his own weakness and in the power of his tempter. It was partly for this reason, indeed, that man found mercy, whereas there was no redemption for the angels. For, as St. Peter says, "God spared not the angels that sinned" (2 Peter 2:4). This, it may be observed, is asserted universally, indicating that all who fell suffered punishment. For these and other reasons theologians very commonly teach that the doom and punishment followed in the next instant after the offense, and many go so far as to say there was no possibility of repentance. But here it will be well to bear in mind the distinction drawn between revealed doctrine, which comes with authority, and theological speculation, which to a great extent rests on reasoning. No one who is really familiar with the medieval masters, with their wide differences, their independence, their bold speculation, is likely to confuse the two together. But in these days there is some danger that we may lose sight of the distinction.

It is true that, when it fulfils certain definite conditions, the agreement of theologians may serve as a sure testimony to revealed doctrine, and some of their thoughts and even their very words have been adopted by the Church in her definitions of dogma. But at the same time these masters of theological thought freely put forward many more or less plausible opinions, which come to us with reasoning rather than authority, and must needs stand or fall with the arguments by which they are supported. In this way we may find that many of them may agree in holding that the angels who sinned had no possibility of repentance. But it may be that it is a matter of argument, that each one holds it for a reason of his own and denies the validity of the arguments adduced by others.

Some argue that from the nature of the angelic mind and will there was an intrinsic impossibility of repentance. But it may be observed that in any case the basis of this argument is not revealed teaching, but philosophical speculation. And it is scarcely surprising to find that its sufficiency is denied by equally orthodox doctors who hold that if the fallen angels could not repent this was either because the doom was instantaneous, and left no space for repentance, or because the needful grace was denied them. Others, again, possibly with better reason, are neither satisfied that sufficient grace and room for repentance were in fact refused, nor can they see any good ground for thinking this likely, or for regarding it as in harmony with all that we know of the Divine mercy and goodness.

In the absence of any certain decision on this subject, we may be allowed to hold, with Suarez, that, however brief it may have been, there was enough delay to leave an opportunity for repentance, and that the necessary grace was not wholly withheld. If none actually repented, this may be explained in some measure by saying that their strength of will and fixity of purpose made repentance exceedingly difficult, though not impossible; that the time, though sufficient, was short; and that grace was not given in such abundance as to overcome these difficulties.

The language of the prophets (Isaiah 14; Ezekiel 28) would seem to show that Lucifer held a very high rank in the heavenly hierarchy. And, accordingly, we find many theologians maintaining that before his fall he was the foremost of all the angels. Suarez is disposed to admit that he was the highest negatively, i.e. that no one was higher, though many may have been his equals. But here again we are in the region of pious opinions, for some divines maintain that, far from being first of all, he did not belong to one of the highest choirs--Seraphim, Cherubim, and Thrones--but to one of the lower orders of angels. In any case it appears that he holds a certain sovereignty over those who followed him in his rebellion. For we read of "the Devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), "the dragon and his angels" (Apocalypse 12:7), "Beelzebub, the prince of devils"--which, whatever be the interpretation of the name, clearly refers to Satan, as appears from the context: "And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? Because you say that through Beelzebub I cast out devils" (Luke 11:15, 18), and "the prince of the Powers of this air" (Ephesians 2:2). At first sight it may seem strange that there should be any order or subordination amongst those rebellious spirits, and that those who rose against their Maker should obey one of their own fellows who had led them to destruction. And the analogy of similar movements among men might suggest that the rebellion would be likely to issue in anarchy and division. But it must be remembered that the fall of the angels did not impair their natural powers, that Lucifer still retained the gifts that enabled him to influence his brethren before their fall, and that their superior intelligence would show them that they could achieve more success and do more harm to others by unity and organization than by independence and division.

Besides exercising this authority over those who were called "his angels", Satan has extended his empire over the minds of evil men. Thus, in the passage just cited from St. Paul, we read, "And you, when you were dead in your offenses and sins, wherein in times past you walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of this air, of the spirit that now worketh on the children of unbelief" (Ephesians 2:1-2). In the same way Christ in the Gospel calls him "the prince of this world". For when His enemies are coming to take Him, He looks beyond the instruments of evil to the master who moves them, and says: "I will not now speak many things to you, for the prince of this world cometh, and in me he hath not anything" (John 14:30).

There is no need to discuss the view of some theologians who surmise that Lucifer was one of the angels who ruled and administered the heavenly bodies, and that this planet was committed to his care. For in any case the sovereignty with which these texts are primarily concerned is but the rude right of conquest and the power of evil influence. His sway began by his victory over our first parents, who, yielding to his suggestions, were brought under his bondage. All sinners who do his will become in so far his servants. For, as St. Gregory says, he is the head of all the wicked--"Surely the Devil is the head of all the wicked; and of this head all the wicked are members" (Certe iniquorum omnium caput diabolus est; et hujus capitis membra sunt omnes iniqui.--Hom. 16, in Evangel.). This headship over the wicked, as St. Thomas is careful to explain, differs widely from Christ's headship over the Church, inasmuch as Satan is only head by outward government and not also, as Christ is, by inward, life-giving influence (Summa III:8:7).

With the growing wickedness of the world and the spreading of paganism and false religions and magic rites, the rule of Satan was extended and strengthened till his power was broken by the victory of Christ, who for this reason said, on the eve of His Passion: "Now is the judgment of the world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out" (John 12:31). By the victory of the Cross Christ delivered men from the bondage of Satan and at the same time paid the debt due to Divine justice by shedding His blood in atonement for our sins.

In their endeavours to explain this great mystery, some old theologians, misled by the metaphor of a ransom for captives made in war, came to the strange conclusion that the price of Redemption was paid to Satan. But this error was effectively refuted by St. Anselm, who showed that Satan had no rights over his captives and that the great price wherewith we were bought was paid to God alone (cf. ATONEMENT).

What has been said so far may suffice to show the part played by the Devil in human history, whether in regard to the individual soul or the whole race of Adam. It is indicated, indeed, in his name of Satan, the adversary, the opposer, the accuser, as well as by his headship of the wicked ranged under his banner in continual warfare with the kingdom of Christ.

The two cities whose struggle is described by St. Augustine are already indicated in the words of the Apostle, "In this the children of God are manifest and the children of the devil: for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God appeared, that He might destroy the works of the devil" (1 John 3:8).

Whether or not the foreknowledge of the Incarnation was the occasion of his own fall, his subsequent course has certainly shown him the relentless enemy of mankind and the determined opponent of the Divine economy of redemption. And since he lured our first parents to their fall he has ceased not to tempt their children in order to involve them in his own ruin. There is no reason, indeed, for thinking that all sins and all temptations must needs come directly from the Devil or one of his ministers of evil. For it is certain that if, after the first fall of Adam, or at the time of the coming of Christ, Satan and his angels had been bound so fast that they might tempt no more, the world would still have been filled with evils. For men would have had enough of temptation in the weakness and waywardness of their hearts. But in that case the evil would clearly have been far less than it is now, for the activity of Satan does much more than merely add a further source of temptation to the weakness of the world and the flesh; it means a combination and an intelligent direction of all the elements of evil.

The whole Church and each one of her children are beset by dangers, the fire of persecution, the enervation of ease, the dangers of wealth and of poverty, heresies and errors of opposite characters, rationalism and superstition, fanaticism and indifference. It would be bad enough if all these forces were acting apart and without any definite purpose, but the perils of the situation are incalculably increased when all may be organized and directed by vigilant and hostile intelligences.

It is this that makes the Apostle, though he well knew the perils of the world and the weakness of the flesh, lay special stress on the greater dangers that come from the assaults of those mighty spirits of evil in whom he recognized our real and most formidable foes--"Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places . . . Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, having on the breastplate of justice, and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; in all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one" (Ephesians 6:11, 16).

APA citation. Kent, W. (1908). Devil. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.

MLA citation. Kent, William. "Devil." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 4. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908.

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.

_________________________________________________________________________________

God and His Messiah Jesus Christ our Lord - our right and duty to witness to Him: The Justice of God: Ancient pagan lies - and the Rothschilds in America and Russia and Y'israHell - The Judeo-Masonic Conspiracy: "John 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof"