Part Eleven

O Villain! thou hast stolen both mine office and my name.

To those unacquainted with the power and scope of secret societies, the personality of Pope Paul VI presents a veritable enigma. No other Pope, even in the most tempestuous times, has been the subject of such conflicting reports; no other Pope has been so apparently self-contradictory. Even a casual reading of his reign leaves an impression of doubt, equivocation, and a pathetically weak kind of hedging that is a far remove from the assertive Pontificates of the past.

For how can one account for a Pope lamenting, as Paul did, that ‘one can no longer trust the Church’? He signed the documents that kept Vatican Two on course, and promised, almost in the early hours of his reign, to consolidate and implement its decisions. Yet he changed his tune even before the last of its sessions.

‘One would have believed the Council would have brought sunny days for the Church’s history. On the contrary, they are days of storm, cloud, and fog. How did this come about?’

And the answer he provided:

‘We think there has been the influence of a hostile Power. His name is the Devil’

– tempts one to ask whether that was a form of confession, a self-indictment. Was he merely expressing what he knew had become fact, or speaking as a victim, a disillusioned man in the grip of forces beyond his control?

Compare his judgments with those of almost any of his predecessors, a Pius V, a Leo XIII, and the contrast appears to be, as I said before, quite pitiful. To quote but two instances. On 14 September, 1972, he came down heavily against the suggestion that women might play some part in the ministry of the priesthood.


Such a departure from custom was unthinkable. Yet his was not a decisive voice, for only some three weeks later the Vatican issued a hand-out to journalists announcing that the Pope might change his mind. The final contradiction came on 29 March, 1973, when the Associated Press reported:

‘Pope Paul ruled today that women, regardless of whether they are nuns, may distribute Communion in Roman Catholic churches.’

The Pope had already, in May 1969, condemned a new departure that had crept in whereby Communion was received in the hand. Yet later he took that stricture back, with the meaningless proviso that Communion bread could be so received ‘after proper instruction.’

His weakness, his yielding to innovation in ritual and practice, together with the acceptance of revolutionary Marxism, and the many strange rumours that issued, from time to time, from the Vatican, caused many people in more than one part of the world to wonder if they were indeed witnessing the fall of Rome.

It was said that the Pope’s correspondence, before it reached him, passed through the hands of Casaroli, Villot, and Benelli, the Cardinals in virtual control of the Vatican. Statesmen and churchmen who paid official visits found Pope Paul diffident, almost vague, and more ready with comments and opinions than with definite answers. He lacked clarity; and as wonder gave way to a feeling of disquiet, various theories emerged to account for the air of mystery around Peter’s Chair.

Cardinal Agostino Casaroli                     Cardinal Jean Villot                       Cardinal Giovanni Benelli


The most feasible one, that Paul was an anti-pope, a trained Communist infiltrator, could be supported by his known past, his friendship with the anarchist Alinsky and others of his kind in Milan, and the heresies he had fostered since coming to power.

Other explanations will be advanced here (not because they figure among the beliefs of the present writer, who regards them as extravagant, some wildly so), but in order to make known what many intelligent people have come to think in the face of a situation akin to those, in centuries past, when the forces of St. Michael and Asmodeus clashed by the banks of the Tiber.

One theory is that Paul VI, a good Pope in the normal sense, fell into the hands of agents of secret societies (and here the names of Villot, Casaroli, and Benelli crop up again) who drugged him, injected poison into his veins, and made him incapable of reasoning, so that all that purported to be stamped by the magisterium of the Church came, in reality, from the triumvirate of Cardinals.

But that would seem to be ruled out by Montini’s life-long attachment to Marxism, which would have obviated the need for the Left orientated secret societies to exert any pressure upon him.

That would have been superfluous. Though there was one utterance by the Pope, when a dignitary asked him to quieten the widespread alarm, that might have been taken as indicative:

‘Do you people believe the Pope to be badly informed, or subject to pressure?’

At length stories emanating from Rome of sacrilege and abuses committed in church, with the approval of the Pope, became so startling, that groups of people in Europe and America decided to take action.

This culminated in a Mr. Daniel Scallen of the Marian Press in Georgetown, Ontario, Canada, employing the Pinkerton Detective Agency in New York to investigate. One of the agency’s detectives was sent, in 1973, to Rome, and he returned with a story that dwarfed all other speculations, however sensational.

He had determined that there were two Popes living in the Vatican, Paul VI and an impostor who had been made to resemble Montini with the aid of plastic surgery. Several such operations were necessary, and when colour photographs of the false Pope were sent to interested circles in Munich, where the imposture is still receiving concentrated study, there were certain noticeable differences in the two sets of features that could not be overcome.

To point out the differences: Montini had clear blue eyes, large, and being long-sighted he only required glasses for near viewing. The impostor had green eyes, small, and he wore glasses with thick lenses on all occasions.

Montini’s photographs reveal a small mole, or birth-mark, between the left eye and the left ear. This does not appear in photographs of the impostor, whose left eyebrow was nearer to the eye than was Montini’s.

The differences between the nose and the ears of the two men are held to be decisive. Montini’s nose was Roman, and protruded somewhat over his mouth. The impostor’s nose, part straight and part hooked, was short, and those who subjected the photographs to professional examination claim to have detected the insertion of a plastic strip in the nose to make it appear more straight.

But it is differences in the shape and formation of the ears that present the greatest difficulty to those who doubt the existence of an impostor. Such differences are unique, individual, and they are treated the same as finger-prints in courts of law. Any comparison of the lobes and build of the ears, as revealed by photographs, becomes not a little impressive.

But the interested circles did not stop there. They turned their attention upon the voice, and called in the help of the Type B-65 Kay Elemetrics of Pine Brook, New Jersey, and the Ball Telephone Company. Their object was to analyze the voice (or voices, if there were indeed two popes) when they pronounced the traditional Easter Sunday and Christmas Day blessing, with the words Indulgentium Peccatorum, spoken from the Vatican in 1975.

On both occasions the message was broadcast over Rome, and many people taped it; and it appeared, according to sonograms that were made – and sonograms are more sensitive than the ear – that the man who had spoken at Easter, and again at Christmas, had not been one and the same. There had been two different speakers.

Here I quote from those who are qualified to judge the sonograms and sum up the distinctions:

One voice had a much lower pitch than the other, with a more pronounced dragging of word syllables.

Another difference was that one voice had a much lower range of frequencies. It emitted a more hissing sound, and was noticeably shaky.

These graphs were submitted to the FBI for examination, and the same conclusions were arrived at. The voice patterns were different, and indicated that the vocal chords, the mouth, and the lips, were unique to each individual.

Subsequent statements alleging that there was a false Pope Paul VI, go on to say that he was an actor whose initials are P.A.R., and that it was he who died at Castelgandolfo on 6 August, 1978. A German Bishop, who claims to have proof that Montini was last known to be living not in the Vatican but in the outskirts of Rome, hopes to make this public in a forthcoming book.

So could this point to the fact that the genuine Paul VI was held captive in the Vatican, or that he was kidnapped, perhaps murdered? A layman in search of more concrete evidence went to Brescia, where some of Montini’s relations were living. There a niece informed him that they were perfectly well aware of the imposture, but that all their efforts to make it known had been stifled.

The investigator, who was obviously untried and filled with a crusading zeal to bring things into the open, soon landed in trouble. He was jailed for four years, and afterwards deported from Italy. All efforts to trace his whereabouts since then have failed.

Well, as part of the prevailing confusion in the Roman stronghold, that is what some far from negligible people have come to believe.

[Evidence for the above can be found at below. The discerning reader will not fail to distinguish between the actual evidence presented and the authenticity or otherwise of the apparitions of Bayside - ed.]


"The Deception of the Century"

from EndTime'sProphecy Website

Paul VI: the Pope of 1972

One of the most startling revelations of Our Lady of the Roses was the message concerning "the deception of the century," in which an actor was substituted for Pope Paul VI in certain public appearances beginning around the year 1975. Sound incredible? There is an astonishing amount of evidence for this claim: photos, voice prints, testimonials of pilgrims in Rome who witnessed this fact themselves, a reported exorcism in Switzerland, and Our Lady of the Roses apparitions in New York.

Sister Lucy tried to warn Pope Paul VI

On May 13, 1967, after a Mass celebrated in front of the basilica in Fatima, Portugal, Sister Lucy approached Pope Paul VI and requested, "I want to have a private conversation with you." She repeated this request many times. Obviously, Sister Lucy had an important message for him. But Pope Paul VI refused her request and replied, "See, it is not the moment."

Sister Lucy withdrew. Pope Paul VI got up and turned towards the statue of Our Lady of Fatima, trying to place a silver Rosary between Her hands. As he could not reach them, he deposited the Rosary at the statue's feet.
The crowd shouted: "Lucia, Lucia, Lucia!" Then Bishop Hnilica led Sister Lucy onto the front of the podium. When the hundreds of thousands of pilgrims saw Sister Lucy near the Pope, they applauded. But TV reporters and hundreds of cameras recorded a stunning event: Sister Lucy was crying. Why?

Pope Paul's plea for help

On June 29, 1972, Pope Paul VI stunned the world with the words:

"From some fissure the smoke of satan entered into the temple of God."

The Bayside message of September 28, 1978 referred to Paul VI's statement:

“Listen to your Vicar who stated that the smoke of satan had entered My Church. Did he have pride when he brought this knowledge to you? No! He asked for help. And what did you do? You turned away and widened the door for satan to enter!”

(September 28, 1978)

Pope Paul's plea went unheeded and he entered into a martyrdom that would endure for years.

Comparison of photographs: Pope Paul VI vs. the impostor

Left, above - Pope Paul VI: Long nose, reaching to the end of the ear lobe.
Right, above - the impostor pope: Nose much shorter in comparison to ear.

Note the prominent birthmark between the eye and ear of the true Pope (on the left, 1973 photo) and conspicuously absent on the impostor (right, 1977 photo). Notice the visible difference in the nose. Pope Paul has a longer, straighter, more pointed nose. The impostor has a shorter and rounder nose.

Left - Pope Paul VI: Notice complete difference of ear structure with that of the impostor. Due to the tiny bone structure the ear is the hardest thing to change in plastic surgery—this becomes obvious in the two pictures.
Right - the impostor pope: Notice not only the difference of the ear, but also the shorter nose.

- Pope Paul VI: Long straight nose—almost to the end of ear lobe. Ear is full and round.
Right - the impostor pope: Nose is shorter and rounder—reaching only 3/4 length of ear. Ear is longer and not as wide.

(Note: Some have conjectured that this "actor of great talent" was the stage actor Parr.)

Voice prints (same exact words, different voice signatures):

Photos are only one type of physical evidence to distinguish identity. Other physical evidence includes fingerprints, voice-prints, medical findings, etc. In his Umsturz im Vatikan? (An Overthrow in the Vatican?), Kolberg presents further evidence for the existence of the impostor pope.


Voice recordings of the Latin "Urbi et Urbi" speech of "the Pope" were made on two different occasions. The two recordings were passed through a voice-frequency analyzer made by Kay Elemetrics of Pine Brook, New Jersey. The output Type B/65 sonagram voice prints of the same words pronounced by the "the Pope" on two occasions shows that they they were made by two different men.

The mysterious betrayal of Cardinal Mindszenty

The story surrounding the valiant shepherd, Cardinal Mindszenty of Hungary (left in photo), adds another dimension to the usurpation of Pope Paul VI's pontificate. This saintly Cardinal suffered imprisonment and torture in his home country of Hungary, speaking out and trying to defend his flock first from Nazism and then from the ravages of communism. In fact, Cardinal Mindszenty suffered at the hands of the communists tortures lasting 39 consecutive days and nights, consisting of sleep-deprivation and every conceivable outrage.


In 1956, as communism tightened its grip on the Church in Hungary, Cardinal Mindszenty was given asylum at the American Embassy in Budapest by President Eisenhower. The Cardinal languished there for fifteen years, unable to leave the building. Communist agents awaited him day and night, to assassinate him should he leave the embassy.

On September 28, 1971 the world heard that Cardinal Mindszenty had arrived in Rome at the invitation of Pope Paul VI. He was received with real joy and tenderness by Pope Paul. The Holy Father embraced Cardinal Mindszenty and hung his own pectoral cross around his neck. They both concelebrated Mass and the Holy Father spoke of the Cardinal as "a guest we have awaited with longing ... a symbol of unshakeable strength rooted in faith and in selfless devotion to the Church."

On October 23, 1971 Pope Paul VI again concelebrated Mass with Cardinal Mindszenty. Pope Paul gave Mindszenty his own cardinal's mantle and told him in Latin,

"You are and remain Archbishop of Esztergom and Primate of Hungary. Continue working and if you have difficulties, turn trustfully to us!"

The Cardinal returned to his pastoral tours around the world. But on February 5, 1974, something unbelievable occurred: he received a letter from the "Pope" declaring the See of Esztergom vacant. The Vatican announced to the world that Cardinal Mindszenty had "retired." The Vatican had lied to the world in a public statement. In profound sorrow Cardinal Mindszenty had to make clear that he had not abdicated, but had been deposed. His Memoirs end with the words:

"This is how I arrived at complete and total exile."

The Vatican was flooded with protests and the free world's press attacked the deposition of Cardinal Mindszenty with fury.

Exactly what did happen? How could Pope Paul VI have betrayed his promise to Cardinal Mindszenty? Did Pope Paul VI really depose Cardinal Mindszenty on February 5, 1974? This is extremely unlikely, in light of a message given on August 21, 1974 (the "V" in the quote below represents Cardinal Villot, the Secretariat of State):

"V does much damage to the Holy Father by changing his correspondence. V rewrites his letters. V censors his mail."
- August 21, 1974

Was the letter sent to Cardinal Mindszenty on February 5, 1974 written by Cardinal Villot? Considering Pope Paul VI's tremendous support of Cardinal Mindszenty and his promise in 1971, this explanation would fit with Our Lady of the Roses message, and the real Third Secret.

Pope Paul VI was drugged

We also know that between 1971 (when Pope Paul met with Cardinal Mindszenty in Rome) and 1974, a lot had taken place. In the April 14, 1973 and September 27, 1975 messages, it was revealed that Pope Paul was being drugged:

Veronica - Now I am... Our Lady is taking me into a bedroom. Oh! I see sisters—they're nurses—in the bedroom. Oh, and there—I can see him in his bed—is the Holy Father. The nurse now has a needle, and she's rolling up now the sleeve. He has on... it looks like a robe, the Holy Father, and she's giving him a needle in his arm. He... and he looks very sick. Now the needle was placed into his left arm, into his left arm. Now as the needle is placed into his left arm, Pope Paul is reaching over onto a table near his bed. He's reaching for his crucifix. He's placing it across his chest.

(April 14, 1973)

"Medication of evil has dulled the brain of the true Pope, Pope Paul VI. They send into his veins poison, to dull his reasoning and paralyze his legs."

(Our Lady, September 27, 1975)

It appears that Cardinal Mindszenty's betrayal is one of many mysteries explained by the overthrow of Pope Paul VI's papacy.

Paul VI died August 6, 1978, at the age of 80.


Back to Contents