What do you think?
Rate this book
The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome
Revisionist historian Michael Hoffman penetrates the sub-strata of the Roman Church after it had departed from fourteen hundred years of Catholic orthodoxy and embraced institutionalized equivocation and deceit, usurious money power and diabolic occultism. Here is an unprecedented investigation of an epoch of spectacular fraud and labyrinth subterfuge unique in western history. As a result of centuries of Neoplatonic-Hermetic intrigue, Rome became the repository and cultivator of alien forces which would only fully emerge in the twentieth century.
The Establishment would have us believe that the papacy of the past is synonymous with relentless inquisition of the occult, when in truth the occult took control of the papacy and from behind a wall of artifice and disguise, persecuted mainly those occultists who set themselves up as rivals to papal power, while shielding agents of the Neoplatonic-Hermetic and Kabbalistic conspiracy within the papal fold. This book names the guilty conspirators including many pontiffs, such as Popes Alexander VI, Leo X, Clement VII, Sixtus V and others. The author demonstrates that much of what we have been told about the history of the Church since the Renaissance has been an ingeniously mounted illusion.
The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome is a chronicle of magic, mind control and the betrayal of the Christian ecclesia on the part of an operation of deception of world-historical significance.
Table of Contents: More Catholic than the Pope; Neoplatonic Hermeticism; The Serpent in the Garden of the Quattrocento; The Priest and the Platonists; Pope Alexander and the Wizard; Bonfire of the Verities; The Sorcerer Abbott; The Reuchlin Revolution; Renaissance High Art: An Initiation; The Grand Egyptian Lodge of Vatican City; The Cabal s Co-conspirators; The Moral Theology of Mental Reservation and Equivocation in the Church of Rome; Ecclesiastical Sodomy and its Root; The Hermetic Prince of the Second Vatican Council; Neoplatonic-Hermetic Kabbalism in the Modern Era; The Breeders of Money Gain Dominion over the Church of Rome; A Prophecy Fulfilled; An Occult Miscellany; Neoplatonic Philosophy and Freemasonry.
The Establishment would have us believe that the papacy of the past is synonymous with relentless inquisition of the occult, when in truth the occult took control of the papacy and from behind a wall of artifice and disguise, persecuted mainly those occultists who set themselves up as rivals to papal power, while shielding agents of the Neoplatonic-Hermetic and Kabbalistic conspiracy within the papal fold. This book names the guilty conspirators including many pontiffs, such as Popes Alexander VI, Leo X, Clement VII, Sixtus V and others. The author demonstrates that much of what we have been told about the history of the Church since the Renaissance has been an ingeniously mounted illusion.
The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome is a chronicle of magic, mind control and the betrayal of the Christian ecclesia on the part of an operation of deception of world-historical significance.
Table of Contents: More Catholic than the Pope; Neoplatonic Hermeticism; The Serpent in the Garden of the Quattrocento; The Priest and the Platonists; Pope Alexander and the Wizard; Bonfire of the Verities; The Sorcerer Abbott; The Reuchlin Revolution; Renaissance High Art: An Initiation; The Grand Egyptian Lodge of Vatican City; The Cabal s Co-conspirators; The Moral Theology of Mental Reservation and Equivocation in the Church of Rome; Ecclesiastical Sodomy and its Root; The Hermetic Prince of the Second Vatican Council; Neoplatonic-Hermetic Kabbalism in the Modern Era; The Breeders of Money Gain Dominion over the Church of Rome; A Prophecy Fulfilled; An Occult Miscellany; Neoplatonic Philosophy and Freemasonry.
723 pages, Paperback
Published May 3, 2017
33 people are currently reading
265 people want to read
About the author
Michael A. Hoffman II
13 books98 followersMichael A. Hoffman II is an independent scholar, a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, and the author of ten books of radical history, journalism and literature.
He studied political science and history under Faiz Abu-Jaber at the State University of New York at Oswego.
He investigates political and occult crime by decoding what he calls twilight language.
He studied political science and history under Faiz Abu-Jaber at the State University of New York at Oswego.
He investigates political and occult crime by decoding what he calls twilight language.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 23, 2021
First the good, Michael if you are reading this I have a few questions for you toward the end of the review (ive seen you comment on other reviews). At around 700 pages this one will take you awhile to really absorb, but by the end you will be glad you spent the time. Honestly, if I had read this 5 years ago I would have skipped my multi year stint in the SSPX and converted straight to Orthodoxy from the Novus Ordo. Now this is not to accuse Hoffman of being Orthodox, but I wonder how he remains Catholic with some of the well argued and well researched accusations he makes concerning the Renaissance papacy. Obviously a brief review on Amazon is too short to provide too many specifics, but one claim(perhaps the CENTRAL claim of the book) Hoffman makes (I agree with him) that will blow your hair back is that the current papal problems didn't start with Vatican II but with the Renaissance and the expanding influence of Jewish Kabbalists and the Talmud. His case is pretty airtight. Im not an expert in the Renaissance papacy but all of his claims are support with primary sources that are thoroughly quoted and footnoted. He also uses a number of mainstream secondary scholarship, though Im not sure why he chose to use Michael Horton's Reformed Theology text to argue one of his theological points when he could have used nearly infinite Catholic or Orthodox sources to make his case.
I only have a few minor quibbles that really amount to personal questions Id like to ask him if I ever meet him. First, he seems to give the theology of the Western Church prior to the Renaissance a pass on Jewish influence. It is fairly widely known that Thomas had no problems correcting Church fathers like John of Damascus using Moses Maimonides. One of those corrections was over the question of Divine Simplicity. Thomas sides with the wrong guy! This may seem minor, but given the indictment of the Church going back 600 years why not just extend the indictment another couple hundred? Anselm is also guilty of over rationalizing the faith and substantially changing the course of theology. Orthodox scholars have been making points like Hoffman's for a 1000 years.
This leads me to want to ask him why he hasn't converted to Orthodoxy? What Church is he attending?
I also wonder how some of the mainstream prominent phds in Reformation/Renaissance have reacted to his work. Do any of them have plans to respond to his claims? Do most agree with what he's saying? I know Michael Allen Gillespie, Brad Gregory, and Charles Taylor have written books that make related claims about the forbears of our current age. Id love to see if they've responded to Hoffman in print anywhere.
There are probably some other few minor points Id disagree with, but nothing worth mentioning here. I think every Catholic should read this; I also plan to read his book on Usury which Im sure is just as good.
I only have a few minor quibbles that really amount to personal questions Id like to ask him if I ever meet him. First, he seems to give the theology of the Western Church prior to the Renaissance a pass on Jewish influence. It is fairly widely known that Thomas had no problems correcting Church fathers like John of Damascus using Moses Maimonides. One of those corrections was over the question of Divine Simplicity. Thomas sides with the wrong guy! This may seem minor, but given the indictment of the Church going back 600 years why not just extend the indictment another couple hundred? Anselm is also guilty of over rationalizing the faith and substantially changing the course of theology. Orthodox scholars have been making points like Hoffman's for a 1000 years.
This leads me to want to ask him why he hasn't converted to Orthodoxy? What Church is he attending?
I also wonder how some of the mainstream prominent phds in Reformation/Renaissance have reacted to his work. Do any of them have plans to respond to his claims? Do most agree with what he's saying? I know Michael Allen Gillespie, Brad Gregory, and Charles Taylor have written books that make related claims about the forbears of our current age. Id love to see if they've responded to Hoffman in print anywhere.
There are probably some other few minor points Id disagree with, but nothing worth mentioning here. I think every Catholic should read this; I also plan to read his book on Usury which Im sure is just as good.
February 18, 2022
He's very selective in his criticism & definitely has a bias he's not sharing with the world (what group is Michael Hoffman a part of? evangelical? Nation of Islam?). He likes to imagine that the church was somehow pure prior to the Renaissance, which is laughable fantasy. Criticisms of Christianity (including Roman Catholicism, Lutherans, Anglicans, Evangelicals, Coptics, Greek Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Russian Orthodox) go all the way back to the beginning. He fails to mention the strange (now heretical) beliefs of "early Christians" or the so-called "Church Fathers" and the vast libraries of heresies, forgeries, and missing documents. Many people want to think that the Roman Church is evil, but that other strains of Christianity are somehow pure, or that we simply need to return to the "early church" whatever they mean by that. After I left Roman Catholicism I looked into various strains of orthodoxy, only to find they have issues just as big as the Roman Catholics, but they like to sweep it under the rug, such as the mass murders that all the churches have perpetuated, or the vast libraries of forgeries & lies, including the "canonical Bible."
Christianity has a bizarre history, that really began when they began the religion of the Roman Empire. They have this enormous library of literature, much of which is fabricated, or has no manuscript evidence prior to modern times. They've changed practices from the earlier versions, so today you hear of "7 sacraments" which was a creation of the University of Paris in the 12th century (nobody believed in "7 sacraments" prior to this). The Jesuits & Roman Church influenced everyone, so the Greek Orthodox, Ethiopians, Coptics, Protestants, and all other offshoots are corrupted. For example, no priest ever said "I absolve you" prior to the creation of this permission in the 12th century. All the scholars know this, but they know it would destroy the credibility of their churches. I believe much or nearly all of "Christian history" is a lie created in modern times.
If you want to selectively read history or believe in a "pure Christianity" of some version or another, go ahead, but it's based on lies and imperial meddling. The truth is that Michal Hoffman wants to omit deeper criticism of Christianity, although it's been widely available for centuries. If you focus all this attention on Alexander VI, you don't have to look at the biblical forgeries, lies, and genocides perpetuated by the Christians in the 4th century & after. The concept of the "early church" is so blurry and murky that you can't really speak of an "early church" as no such thing ever existed. It all becomes proof texting, obedience, and cherry picking whatever you want. There's a reason "Christianity" has been a heavily fragmented group, because there never was uniformity, and there never was an orthodox Christianity of the early church.
Christianity has a bizarre history, that really began when they began the religion of the Roman Empire. They have this enormous library of literature, much of which is fabricated, or has no manuscript evidence prior to modern times. They've changed practices from the earlier versions, so today you hear of "7 sacraments" which was a creation of the University of Paris in the 12th century (nobody believed in "7 sacraments" prior to this). The Jesuits & Roman Church influenced everyone, so the Greek Orthodox, Ethiopians, Coptics, Protestants, and all other offshoots are corrupted. For example, no priest ever said "I absolve you" prior to the creation of this permission in the 12th century. All the scholars know this, but they know it would destroy the credibility of their churches. I believe much or nearly all of "Christian history" is a lie created in modern times.
If you want to selectively read history or believe in a "pure Christianity" of some version or another, go ahead, but it's based on lies and imperial meddling. The truth is that Michal Hoffman wants to omit deeper criticism of Christianity, although it's been widely available for centuries. If you focus all this attention on Alexander VI, you don't have to look at the biblical forgeries, lies, and genocides perpetuated by the Christians in the 4th century & after. The concept of the "early church" is so blurry and murky that you can't really speak of an "early church" as no such thing ever existed. It all becomes proof texting, obedience, and cherry picking whatever you want. There's a reason "Christianity" has been a heavily fragmented group, because there never was uniformity, and there never was an orthodox Christianity of the early church.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews