Thursday, May 21, 2015

Truth Devoured by a Wolf


Revisionist History Newsletter issue no. 78


"Truth Devoured by a Wolf" 
16 page magazine format. Nearly 18,000 words!

The “Wolf Hall” TV series on PBS and two books by British author Hilary Mantel shred the reputation of St. Thomas More and rehabilitate the king’s slavish bureaucratic hatchet man, Thomas Cromwell. What are the facts behind the famous Tudor power struggle over the king’s marriage to Anne Boleyn? 

What lessons in rule by Cryptocracy does this historical epoch have to teach? 

Sections include: Thomas More: the saint who burned heretics and hunted booksellers; More’s involvement with the Neoplatonic Hermetic conspiracy; Hilary Mantel: false accuser; the plight of the only untarnished saint in this tale of woe: Catherine of Aragon, the queen who had been Henry’s true wife for 20 years; Rise and Fall of Anne Boleyn; Did Thomas More die for the Occult Church or the Catholic Church?; Did the occult Renaissance Church of Rome work covertly for Henry’s divorce? Errors and bias in “Wolf Hall.” Did More acquit himself at the end? How Cromwell and Henry VIII created a template for tyranny, and more! 

Join us on the trail of the hidden hand of the Cryptocracy inside the Tudor power struggle! 

Revisionist History Newsletter: Featuring always intriguing adventures in history!


Tuesday, May 05, 2015

May 4, 1515: Reign of the Loansharks Begins

500 years ago the Pope of Rome made possible the beginning of the rule of the Money Power over the West

By Michael Hoffman

Medici Pope Leo X

On May 4 1515, the 500th anniversary of which was this month, Medici Pope Leo X (Giovanni di Lorenzo de’ Medici), issued a papal bull permitting interest on loans of money if the loans were to the poor. This revolutionary permission was granted for so-called charity banks, which were known as Monte di Pieta, which translates as “mountains of compassion,” but quite a bit of the revenue ended up in the hands of the Medici bankers, not the poor, and even if these usury banks had been operated for the alleged benefit of the indigent alone, they were violating God’s law and creating a precedent for more usury.

Pope Leo X initiated a process of gradualism, whereby the Church's immemorial dogmatic law against the charging of interest on loans of money was incrementally relaxed and diluted, leading to a papal revolution —  the complete abolition of all ecclesiastical penalties for usury by Pope Pius VIII in his revolutionary bull of Aug. 18, 1830, Datum in audientia — as well as the absence of all such penalties in the 1917 and 1983 Codes of Canon Law. 

The thesis of this writer’s book, Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not, is that the Renaissance Roman Church parted ways with the Church of All Time. It trafficked in fake relics and indulgences as supervised by the Fugger bankers of Augsburg. The Fuggers, with the support of the Hapsburgs, were far wealthier than any single Italian banking dynasty, including the Medici. Did you ever even hear of the Fuggers? Did you know that grievances over their operations were a motive for Martin Luther’s rebellion? The Fuggers controlled the transfer of revenues from the German Church to the papacy. Their loans to the pope brought them a portfolio of revenue-collecting privileges, including from the sale of indulgences. 

In 1519 the Fuggers bought the election of Spain’s Charles V as Holy Roman Emperor. Of the 851,000 Rhenish Florins raised to purchase the office for King Charles, the Fuggers contributed 543,000 florins. They were usury bankers to the popes and to the House of Hapsburg.  In September 1514, eight months before Leo X’s relaxation of the usury ban, papist theologian Johannes Eck of Ingolstadt, Luther’s nemesis, served as the corrupt mascot for the Money Power, as personified by the banker Jakob Fugger. Eck argued in a debate at the Carmelite monastery in Augsburg, that loan contracts at five percent interest were justified.

Is it a coincidence that Medici Pope Leo X issued his papal bull “Inter multiplicis” allowing for the interest-charging Montis Pietatis, the very next year? The pontiff anticipated the unpopularity of his bull and therefore threatened to excommunicate every Catholic who spoke against his gradualist overthrow of the magisterial dogma, by his relaxation, in the name of  charity, of the immemorial proscription against all interest on loans of money. 

Apologists for Leo X put forth a loophole for his exoneration: they quibble that he did not actually change the dogma on usury, just the pastoral application of the dogma. Yes, that’s true, and it was precisely these “pastoral” means which were employed gradually over the centuries from May 4, 1515 onward, to transform usury from a mortal sin to no sin at all.

 This “pastoral” technique for nullification of the Law of God should be familiar to all students of the devious tactics of revolutionary change agents, among whom the most notable contemporary example is the current pontiff, Pope Francis, the spiritual heir of Giovanni di Lorenzo de’ Medici.

Adherents of the Church of Rome often scapegoat Protestant leader John Calvin for being the first to initiate the usury plague. Calvin was not yet six-years-old when Pope Leo X issued Inter multiplicis. 

No pope after Leo X restored the true Catholic Church’s immutable dogma. Every subsequent pope either did nothing or extended the incremental permissions. Toothless anti-usury bombast from Leo XIII and other popes served to camouflage the devious, gradualist process at work. (Benedict XIV’s masterpiece of dissimulation, Vix Pervenit, advertised as a monumental anti-usury jeremiad, contains a sly loophole for the continuation of usurious operations. “Catholic” usury banks continued to flourish in the wake of Vix Pervenit). 

The Cryptocracy uses similar tactics in different situations. If we study the methods and double talk by which Thomas Cromwell and Thomas Cranmer began to dissolve Catholicism in England in the 1530s we will observe the methods and double talk by which every pope from Leo X to Pius VIII  and onward, dissolved Almighty God’s bulwark against the Money Power (Luke 6: 34-36).

On May 4, 1515 situation ethics began its reign over Rome. After 500 years it is time to face the truth about the Renaissance papacy and its successors. To fail to do so is to ensure that God’s Law and His Church remain occluded and marginalized, while the Money Power’s most devastatingly effective tool continues to destroy the abundant life that is our heritage as heirs of Jesus Christ.  The love of money is the root of all evil. Usury is the weaponization of that love. All subsequent evils which have beset us emanate from this greatest of all iniquities. 

Copyright©2015. All Rights Reserved.

For Further Research:

 Usury in Christendom (softcover, 416 pages) may be purchased hereAn index to the book is available online free of charge at this link

Questions for Hoffman concerning his book about usury

Hoffman is the editor of the journal Revisionist History, published six times a year. 

He is currently at work on his eighth book, “The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome.” 

Michael will give two talks on June 20 and 21 at the America’s Promise Bible Conference in Sandpoint, Idaho. Contact Pastor Dave Barley for further information at or tel. 208-265-5405.

Monday, May 04, 2015

What is Sacred to Americans?

By Michael Hoffman

The free speech fest in Texas that resulted in the police shooting of two apparent terrorists at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland marks growing prominence and qualified support for the movement for free speech for anti-Muslim satire, led by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, a well-financed New York group. 

No similar type of organization in America dares to test free speech for anti-Auschwitz gas chamber-hoax satire, however. In Europe, if you mock Muhammad the West will hail you. If you mock the gas chambers they will jail you.

In the late 1980s, after Zionists in Torrance, California burned hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of books questioning whether Six Million Judaics really died in World War II, this writer created a comic book, Tales of the Holohoax. In Britain two men distributed it and went to prison. Simon Sheppard was sentenced to three years and ten months and Stephen Whittle for one year and ten months, along with the seizure of their computers and printing equipment. (You can read the British court’s lengthy decision here). 

When the “Charlie Hebdo” people were massacred in Paris last January 7, we contacted major media in the US and Britain to remind them, in the midst of their stirring hoopla for the rights of “Charlie” to denigrate Muhammad, that two English guys had rotted in prison because the West does not confer that same right on satires of Holocaustianity. We were ignored. 

In the U.S. there is that right in theory, but in fact those who satirize the Talmud, the Holy State of Counterfeit “Israel,” and those miraculous execution gas chambers, most likely won’t be able find a hall or building to rent for an exhibition; they won’t have police protection or a well-funded New York “freedom of expression” organization behind them. What is the use of a right if one can’t exercise it? The level of demonization of “Holocaust” satirists is so savage it mostly preempts our right to any meaningful exercise of freedom of the press.

So which is more sacred: the fake homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkenau, or the person of Muhammad? There’s no contest. Holocaustianity is the informal civic religion of the West; the last truly believed religion in the otherwise agnostic West. Woe to those who would even think of mocking it.

Sharia Law and Talmudic Law

Yahoo state legislatures in the misnamed “Bible belt” (actually it’s the “Talmud belt”) have gone ballistic over the supposed imminent imposition of Islamic “Sharia” law on America. Personally, I don’t see much sharia law in the USA, but I do see a surfeit of Talmud law. For example, just a few years ago even the liberal state of California passed a law prohibiting the “marriage” of sodomites. Similar enactments of the will of the majority of the American people were widespread across the nation. Then Talmudic tactics were employed by Federal judges. In Orthodox Judaism laws are not made by a legislature. In Judaism the law is made by judicial decision. Rabbinic courts make the laws and it is by that law-making function of the US courts that the will of the majority of the American people has been overthrown. Through Talmudic-style jurisprudence, the chicken littles who have raised the alarm about Sharia law have seen their family values flushed by “gay” rights, law-making judges who have usurped the function of a people’s legislature, in line with the Talmud. The influence of Talmudic law, like the phony homicidal gas chambers of Auschwitz, is too sacred to become a point of contention in America. We have been infantilized by Big Brother to concentrate our indignation on approved targets: Muhammad, Islam, Sharia law.

The Americans crying the loudest against the spectre of Islamic rule in Tennessee or Alabama or Arkansas support the Republicans in Congress who obey their Israeli god-kings. These Republicans pressure Obama to ally CIA-backed “Syrian rebels” with al Qaeda’s Nusra front because the script decrees that like Libya, the government of Syria must fall to an Islamic fundamentalism controlled by Saudi Arabia, a key Israeli ally. 

The media’s rage is directed at Iran because that’s where Netanyahu has ordered American anger to be focused, while Saudi Arabia, which will not permit a single Christian church to exist on its soil and whose perverse Wahhabist theology inspires and directs ISIS and al Qaeda, is presented in the media as America’s friend and ally, compared to dastardly Iran.

In Israeli hospitals al Qaeda fighters wounded in Syria are being treated, after which those fighters are returned to the battle field. The Israelis are aiding and abetting terrorists. Nothing new about that. 

The CIA built up the Taliban prior to Sept. 11, 2001 and then American men and women were sent to fight the Taliban. The CIA is ensuring the fall of the pro-Christian government of Syria to Saudi proxies. Christians will flee and Syria will serve, like Libya, as another huge staging area for al Qaeda and ISIS. The wars and instability this will generate will cause Shiite Iran to react defensively. 

Bread and circuses

74 million bucks was shelled out by thousands of suckers to sit in the presence of two pugilists doing a dance in Las Vegas over the weekend of May 2. Many tens of thousands more paid one hundred dollars to watch the charade at home on their glass toilets. Besides the Talmud and Holocaustianity, coliseum sports are the other sacred icon of Americans. This is what counts with them. This is what they will pay exorbitant prices to see.

Every four years increasingly insane Americans pause to wonder why presidential elections offer no real choice and why criminal politics and the Money Power continue to rise across the land. 

People whose god is the Prime Minister of so-called “Israel,” or a $100 million-a-fight boxer will get the country and the future they deserve.

+ + +

Copyright©2015. All Rights Reserved

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

Media-approved Neo-Nazism

By Michael Hoffman

Peter Fonda in “The Wild Angels"

The New York Times is known around our office as Holocaust Weekly News. Just about every seven days (or thereabouts) the “venerable" Zionist “newspaper of record” resurrects some angle on the persecution of Judaic persons 70 or more years ago in WWII, in what is known in Orwellian Newspeak as the "Holocaust.” Recent holocausts of Palestinians by the Israelis, or slightly older holocausts such as Ariel Sharon’s terror bombing of the city of Beirut in August 1982, are consigned by the Times to the dust of the Orwellian memory hole (one can’t write of Zionist propaganda sins of omission and commission without invoking some aspect of George Orwell’s dystopian prophecies).

Holocaust Weekly News reserves a corner of the paper for solemn homilies concerning the crimes of Nazism and the horrid possibility of its resurgence among “Right wing extremists.” Every vestige of the least Nazi sympathies are ferreted out, analyzed and then condemned with a string of self-righteous pomposity. The spiritual heirs of those who dispossess the Palestinians wax eloquent against the dispossession of the “Jews” by the Nazis.

There is, however, a neo-Nazism about which the New York Times and the rest of the establishment media find little or nothing to vituperate: the kind of neo-Nazism from which Hollywood reaps bushels of money. One such exercise in Hollywood’s venal Nazi glorification and exploitation is “The Wild Angels," a 1967  movie produced by American International Pictures (AIP) and starring Peter Fonda. The New York Times observes that it was a “hugely popular” film. 

"Hugely popular” translates as hugely profitable. Last March “The Wild Angels” was released on a blu-ray DVD. The movie is loaded with Nazi imagery and icons (dig Mr. Fonda’s groovy belt buckle and the insignia under the “13” patch on his leather jacket in the photo above). The Times acknowledges that, "Swastikas abound, beginning with the logo for the movie’s title in the opening credits, which transforms a capital T into a version of the crooked cross.  

And thats it. No anti-Nazi comment of any kind is forthcoming from the New York Times, august keeper of the “Holocaust” flame. The Times simply writes: "Out on Blu-ray and DVD in a fine digital transfer, ‘The Wild Angels’ may not have been the first movie in which a character exclaimed “Out of sight, man!” but, released three summers before “Easy Rider,” and introducing much of the same the hippie youth film possible…Exuberantly directed by AIP’s mainstay, Roger Corman, and propelled by a twangy surf-music score...”

It looks as though the Times has suspended its Nazi-hunting holocaust hysteria long enough to celebrate a highly profitable Hollywood neo-Nazi flick, terming it “exuberant’" and "expertly directed.” The Nazi doings even take place to the sounds of "twangy surf music.” Out of sight, man!

Hoffman is the editor of the journal Revisionist History, published six times a year.


Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Islamic Fundamentalism allied with Judaism

John McCain’s CIA-backed rebels fight alongside al Qaeda terrorists in Syria: This represents the open betrayal and mockery of the victims of the 9/11 terror attacks.


At this link, scroll down on the page to order a pdf. of newsletter no. 70: 


Monday, April 27, 2015

Progress Report on Michael Hoffman’s Writing Projects

Sorry to have been out of touch these past two weeks. This is is due to the following two projects.

1. Revisionist History newsletter issue no. 78 (don’t order yet please):

An extensive review of the BBC propaganda television series “Wolf Hall” and the history of King Henry VIII, St. Thomas More, Anne Boleyn and Thomas Cromwell and their era. This six part TV series is being nationally broadcast Sunday evenings on taxpayer-supported PBS television. Episode four features the decline and fall of More, the claim that he tortured people in his home (false) and how wounded poor Henry VIII is by the “disloyalty” of his friends (quite the laugh in view of the dozen or so loyal friends and one lawfully wedded wife who Henry himself had betrayed up to this point in his reign). The part of More is brilliantly played by Anton Lesser. Episode four can be seen free of charge until May 24 at this link:

“Wolf Hall” is based on the two “historical” novels by the Catholic-hating author Hilary Mantel. Her bigotry is no bar to her literary success. Her volumes full of lies transform two monsters (the proto-Stalinist butcher Henry VIII and the tyrant’s master of treachery, Thomas Cromwell) into a hero and an anti-hero respectively (the portrayal of Cromwell is almost completely falsified -- exactly opposite of what the documentary record reveals about him). Mantel’s books were awarded the Booker Prize, the highest of all literary awards in Britain. Mantel grants legitimacy, among the pop culture reading public and other historical illiterates, to the British crown, and that effort is worth handsome remuneration in the eyes of the Cryptocracy. 

 2. The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome

This is our all-consuming project: my large history has consumed nearly my every waking moment for the past two years. Progress report: the book is divided into three parts: 1. Lying, Mental Reservation and Equivocation (95% complete). 2. Judaism and the Neoplatonic/Hermetic Occult (40-45% complete). 3 Usury and the Money Power (15% complete, but this is a brief section in comparison with the other two, in view of the fact that I have already written a separate book on this subject (Usury in Christendom). Section three of the new book concerns recent historical research on the Church of Rome and the Money Power not in my original work. 

If God grants me the scholarly industry and I work throughout the summer without a break (other than my two speeches in Sandpoint Idaho June 20-21), I might complete The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome by September, otherwise I fear it will be January of 2016. 

We recently paid for a professional English translation of portions of a very important and obscure book written in French. We must still pay for Latin translations. I can read some Latin, but for purposes of writing history I must have legally exact, verbatim et ad litteram translations. After the book is published, if I am attacked by a critic I want it to be on the basis of a dispute over my interpretations and conclusions --which are always debatable -- and not on an error in fact or translation that could have been prevented with greater scrutiny and vigilance. Hence, with the exception of elementary Latin passages, I do not undertake translations on my own. 

Our expenditures for rare books and manuscripts are through the roof. Today I needed five books, I bought two. Of the three I didn’t purchase, two are used copies in good condition at a reduced price and the third is an advanced sale on a book that I have a hunch will be sold out a few weeks after it appears. They are still relatively expensive but not as pricey as they would be if we lose the opportunity to buy these volumes (and more like them in the days and weeks ahead). Anyone who would be willing to donate toward our book-purchasing budget can do so here. Thank you.

In other news, I am not sure if video of the April 11 meeting in Lansing, Michigan will become available or not. When (if?) we receive the footage we’ll burn it to two DVDs and make it available. 

I wish I could be more involved, as I usually am, in analyzing current events in this column and other venues, but at present I cannot. In the meantime, if you can help to promote and publicize the seven books I have already written and which we have difficulty advertising due to bans on our work by the Right and the Left, it would be helpful in building our audience, and the revenue from sales would be welcome.

— Michael Hoffman


Saturday, April 18, 2015

The Traditional Catholicism that ain't

Along with us, our colleague who blogs under the nom de plume, “Maurice Pinay” has offered ample documentation of the anti-Catholic weirdness, perversity and occultism that travels under the moniker, “traditional Catholicism.” Or, as our north Idaho cowboy pal Caleb would say, “Traditional Catholicism ain’t.”

While one of those who Maurice targets as being among the ain’t Catholics is Bp. Richard N. Williamson, nonetheless we do not shy away from employing the following research from Williamson to demonstrate how “sedevacantist Catholicism” ain’t Catholic.

Sedevacantism, for those who don’t know the term, is a “traditional Catholic” faction that declares on its own non-existent authority, that certain “heretical” popes are not popes, and therefore are not owed the obedience due the pontiff.  Sedevacantist priests and alleged bishops depose these popes by stating, “They are formal heretics, therefore they are not popes.” Luther said something like that, so here we have the bipolar manifestation of Lutheran-“traditional Catholicism.” It just gets crazier and goofier as these folks descend further down the ladder of their home-made religion which is situated somewhere between Catholicism, Protestantism and the Twilight Zone.

We don't accept that parish priests or questionably-consecrated “traditional Catholic bishops" have any power or authority whatsoever to declare —  other than to their own conscience —  that a pope is not a pope and can be disobeyed. The very notion smacks more of a proclamation by a backwoods assembly of the Four Square church, than by the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The actual Catholic Church has a theology that teaches that no one can depose a pope  —  that the pope has no peer on earth. According to Catholic theology he is sovereign. Williamson describes the complex Catholic process for removing a heretical pope. Patently, until the process Williamson outlines takes place, the pope elected by the College of Cardinals, whether Paul VI or Francis the one and only, is the pope of the Church of Rome until a Church Council removes him. Bishop Williamson makes the following report, after which we will add one further point.

Church Councils can heretical Popes untie,
For Christ to depose, lest the whole Church die.
The Dominican priests of Avrillé, France, have done us all a great favour by republishing the considerations on the vacant See of Rome written some 400 years ago by a famous thomist theologian from Spain, John of St Thomas (1589–1644). Being a faithful successor of St Thomas
Aquinas, he benefits from that higher wisdom of the Middle Ages when theologians could still measure men by God instead of having to measure God by men, a tendency which began as a necessity (if souls could no longer take medieval penicillin, they had to take a lesser medicine), but which culminated in Vatican II. Here, much abbreviated, are the main ideas of John of St Thomas on the deposition of a Pope:—
Can a Pope be deposed?
Answer, yes, because Catholics are obliged to separate themselves from heretics, after the heretics have been warned (Titus III, 10). Also, a heretical Pope puts the whole Church in a state of legitimate self-defence. But the Pope must be warned first, as officially as possible, in case he would retract. Also his heresy must be public, and declared as officially as possible, to prevent wholesale confusion among Catholics, by their being bound to follow.
II By whom must he be officially declared a heretic?
Answer, not by the Cardinals because although they may elect a Pope, they cannot depose one, because it is the Universal Church that is threatened by a heretical Pope, and so the most universal possible authority of the Church can alone depose him, namely a Church Council composed of a quorum of all the Church’s Cardinals and Bishops. These would be convoked not authoritatively (which the Pope alone can do) but among themselves.
III By what authority would a Church Council depose the Pope?
(Here is the main difficulty because Christ gives to the Pope supreme power over the entire Church, with no exception, as Vatican I defined in 1870. Already John of St Thomas gave arguments of authority, reason and Canon Law to prove this supreme power of the Pope. Then how can a Council, being beneath the Pope, yet depose him? John of St Thomas adopts the solution laid out by another famous Dominican theologian, Thomas Cajetan (1469–1534). The Church’s deposition of the Pope would fall not upon the Pope as Pope, but upon the bond between the man and his Papacy. That may seem hair-splitting, but it is logical.)
On the one hand not even a Church Council has authority over the Pope. On the other hand the Church is obliged to avoid heretics and to protect the sheep. Therefore, just as in a Conclave the Cardinals are the ministers of Christ to bind this man to the Papacy, but Christ alone gives him his papal authority, so the Church Council would be the ministers of Christ to unbind this heretic from the Papacy by their solemn declaration, but Christ alone, by his divine authority over the Pope, would authoritatively depose him. In other words, the Church Council would be deposing the Pope not authoritatively from above, but only ministerially from below. John of St Thomas confirms this conclusion from the Church’s Canon Law, which states in several places that God alone can depose the Pope, but the Church can pass judgment on his heresy.
Alas, as the Dominicans of Avrillé point out, nearly all Cardinals and Bishops of the Church today are so largely infected with modernism that there is no human hope of a Church Council seeing clear to condemn the modernism of the Conciliar Popes. We can only pray and wait for the divine solution, which will come in God’s good time. To follow, is a Pope not automatically deposed by his mere heresy?

Additional point by Michael Hoffman: In reading St. Thomas More’s letter  to England’s Lord Chancellor Thomas Cromwell, which More penned in Chelsea on March 5, 1534, we encountered this sentence: “…in the next general council it may well happen that this Pope may be deposed and another substituted in his room with whom the King’s Highness may be very well content.” (Alvaro De Silva [ed.] The Last Letters of Thomas More [Eerdman’s Publishing, 2000], p. 54).