Keys of This Blood

by Malachi Martin

  The Keys of This Blood

  Books by Malachi Martin

  THE SCRIBAL CHARACTER OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS

  THE PILGRIM (under the pseudonym Michael Serafian)

  THE ENCOUNTER

  THREE POPES AND THE CARDINAL

  JESUS NOW

  THE NEW CASTLE

  HOSTAGE TO THE DEVIL

  THE FINAL CONCLAVE

  KING OF KINGS (a novel)

  THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN CHURCH

  THERE IS STILL LOVE

  RICH CHURCH, POOR CHURCH

  VATICAN (a novel)

  THE JESUITS

  THE KEYS OF THIS BLOOD

  The Keys of This Blood

  Pope John Paul II Versus Russia and the West for Control of the New World Order

  Malachi Martin

  A TOUCHSTONE BOOK

  New York London Toronto Sydney

  Pope John Paul II Versus Russia and the West for Control of the New World Order

  TOUCHSTONE

  Rockefeller Center 1230 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York, 10020

  www.SimonandSchuster.com

  Copyright © 1990 by Malachi Martin

  All rights reserved

  including the right of reproduction

  in whole or in part in any form.

  First Touchstone Edition 1991

  TOUCHSTONE and colophon are registered trademarks

  of Simon & Schuster Inc.

  Designed by Karolina Harris

  Manufactured in the United States of America

  17 18 19 20 Pbk.

  Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

  Martin, Malachi.

  The Keys of This Blood: Pope John Paul II Versus Russia and the West for Control of the New World Order/Malachi Martin.

  p. cm.

  Includes index.

  1. John Paul II, Pope, 1920- .

  2. Gorbachev, Mikhail Sergeyevich, 1931- .

  3. Catholic Church and World Politics.

  4. World Politics—1985-1995.

  I. Title.

  BX1368.5.M37 1990

  909.82′8—dc20 90-42369

  CIP

  ISBN: 0-671-69174-0

  ISBN: 0-671-74723-1 Pbk.

  ISBN: 978-0-671-74723-7

  eISBN: 978-1-439-12764-3

  For the Immaculate Heart

  Contents

  THE SERVANT OF THE GRAND DESIGN

  I. THE GEOPOLITICS OF POWER

  PART ONE: THE ARENA

  1. “Everything Must Change!”

  2. Nobody’s Pope

  3. Into the Arena: Poland

  4. The Visible Man

  5. The Keys of This Blood

  PART TWO: THE LAY OF THE LAND

  6. The Morality of Nations:

  Whatever Happened to Sinful Structures?

  7. The Morality of Nations:

  Rich Man, Poor Man …

  8. The Morality of Nations:

  … Beggarman, Thief

  PART THREE: CHAMPIONS OF HAMMER AND SICKLE

  9. The Hall of Heroes

  10. Karl Marx

  11. V. I. Lenin

  12. Joseph Stalin

  13. Antonio Gramsci: The Haunting of East and West

  PART FOUR: CHAMPIONS OF GLOBALISM

  14. …with Interdependence and Development

  for All

  15. The Provincial Globalists

  16. The Piggyback Globalists

  17. The Genuine Globalists: From Alabama to

  Zambia, Let’s Hear It for Cornflakes

  PART FIVE: SHIFTING GROUND

  18. Forces of the “New Order”:

  Secularism

  19. Forces of the “New Order”:

  The Two Models of a Geopolitical House

  20. Diplomatic Connivance

  21. “Cold-Eyed, I Contemplate the World”

  22. “New Thinking”

  23. Vatican Summit

  24. “New Architecture”

  25. The Millennium Endgame

  II. THE GEOPOLITICS OF FAITH

  PART SIX: THE VISION OF THE SERVANT

  26. Polishness and Papacy

  27. The Pacts of Polishness

  28. The Pacts of Extinction

  29. Papal Training Ground: “Deus Vicit!”

  30. Papal Training Ground: Under the Sign of Solidarność

  31. The Politics of Faith

  32. The Politics of Papacy

  33. In the Final Analysis

  CODA: THE PROTOCOL OF SALVATION

  34. The Judas Complex

  35. The Triple Weakness

  36. Scenario: The Consistory 685

  INDEX

  The Servant of the

  Grand Design

  Willing or not, ready or not, we are all involved in an all-out, no-holds-barred, three-way global competition. Most of us are not competitors, however. We are the stakes. For the competition is about who will establish the first one-world system of government that has ever existed in the society of nations. It is about who will hold and wield the dual power of authority and control over each of us as individuals and over all of us together as a community; over the entire six billion people expected by demographers to inhabit the earth by early in the third millennium.

  The competition is all-out because, now that it has started, there is no way it can be reversed or called off.

  No holds are barred because, once the competition has been decided, the world and all that’s in it—our way of life as individuals and as citizens of the nations; our families and our jobs; our trade and commerce and money; our educational systems and our religions and our cultures; even the badges of our national identity, which most of us have always taken for granted—all will have been powerfully and radically altered forever. No one can be exempted from its effects. No sector of our lives will remain untouched.

  The competition began and continues as a three-way affair because that is the number of rivals with sufficient resources to establish and maintain a new world order.

  Nobody who is acquainted with the plans of these three rivals has any doubt but that only one of them can win. Each expects the other two to be overwhelmed and swallowed up in the coming maelstrom of change. That being the case, it would appear inescapable that their competition will end up as a confrontation.

  As to the time factor involved, those of us who are under seventy will see at least the basic structures of the new world government installed. Those of us under forty will surely live under its legislative, executive and judiciary authority and control. Indeed, the three rivals themselves—and many more besides as time goes on—speak about this new world order not as something around a distant corner of time, but as something that is imminent. As a system that will be introduced and installed in our midst by the end of this final decade of the second millennium.

  What these competitors are talking about, then, is the most profound and widespread modification of international, national and local life that the world has seen in a thousand years. And the competition they are engaged in can be described simply enough as the millennium endgame.

  Ten years before this competition became manifest to the world at large, the man who was destined to become the first, the most unexpected and, for some at least, the most unwelcome competitor of all in this millennium endgame spoke openly about what he saw down the road even then.

  Toward the end of an extended visit to America in 1976, an obscure Polish archbishop from Krakow by the name of Karol Wojtyla stood before an audience in New York City and made one of the most prophetic speeches ever given.

  “We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through,” he said, “… a test of two thousand years
of culture and Christian civilization, with all of its consequences for human dignity, individual rights and the rights of nations.” But, he chided his listeners on that September day, “wide circles of American society and wide circles of the Christian community do not realize this fully….”

  Perhaps the world was still too immersed in the old system of nation-states, and in all the old international balance-of-power arrangements, to hear what Wojtyla was saying. Or perhaps Wojtyla himself was reckoned as no more than an isolated figure hailing from an isolated country that had long since been pointedly written out of the global power equation. Or perhaps, after the industrial slaughter of millions of human beings in two world wars and in 180 local wars, and after the endless terrors of nuclear brinksmanship that have marked the progress of the twentieth century, the feeling was simply that one confrontation more or less wasn’t going to make much difference.

  Whatever the reason, it would seem that no one who heard or later read what Karol Wojtyla said that day had any idea that he was pointing to a competition he already saw on the horizon: a competition between the world’s only three internationally based power structures for truly global hegemony.

  · · ·

  An isolated figure Karol Wojtyla may have been in the fall of 1976—at least for many Westerners. But two years later, in October of 1978, when he emerged from the Sistine Chapel in Rome as Pope John Paul II, the 263rd successor to Peter the Apostle, he was himself the head of the most extensive and deeply experienced of the three global powers that would, within a short time, set about ending the nation system of world politics that has defined human society for over a thousand years.

  It is not too much to say, in fact, that the chosen purpose of John Paul’s pontificate—the engine that drives his papal grand policy and that determines his day-to-day, year-by-year strategies—is to be the victor in that competition, now well under way. For the fact is that the stakes John Paul has placed in the arena of geopolitical contention include everything—himself; his papal persona; the age-old Petrine Office he now embodies; and his entire Church Universal, both as an institutional organization unparalleled in the world and as a body of believers united by a bond of mystical communion.

  The other two contenders in the arena of this “greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through” are no mean adversaries. Rather, they are the leaders of the two most deeply entrenched secular powers, who stand, in a collective sense, on their record as the authors and the primary actors in the period of history that has been so much the worst of times that the best face we can put on it is to say that we were not swallowed up in the apocalypse of World War III—as if that were the best man could do for his fellowman.

  The first of those two powers, the Soviet Union, is now led by John Paul’s most interesting adversary and a fellow Slav. Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev was as unexpected and unpredicted a leader in the new world arena as Karol Wojtyla himself. A husky man still in his prime, hailing from the obscure industrial town of Privolnoye in the southwest of Russia, Gorbachev is now what he was groomed to be: Master of the Leninist-Marxist Party-State whose power and standing in the community of nations was built upon seventy years of physical and spiritual fratricide carried out in the name of a purely sociopolitical vision and a thoroughly this-worldly ideology.

  The final contender in the competition for the new world order is not a single individual leader of a single institution or territory. It is a group of men who are united as one in power, mind and will for the purpose of achieving a single common goal: to be victorious in the competition for the new global hegemony.

  While the acknowledged public leader and spokesman for this group is the current American president, the contenders who compose this assemblage of individuals are Americans and Europeans who, taken together, represent every nation of the Western democratic alliance.

  Unremittingly globalist in their vision and their activities, these individuals operate from two principal bases of power. The first is the power base of finance, industry and technology. Entrepreneurial in their occupations, the men in this phalanx qualify themselves, and are often referred to by others, as Transnationalist in their outlook. What they mean by the term “Transnationalist” is that they intend to, and increasingly do, exercise their entrepreneurship on a worldwide basis. Leaping over all the barriers of language, race, ideology, creed, color and nationalism, they view the world with some justification as their oyster; and the twin pearls of great price that they seek are global development and the good life for all.

  Members of the second phalanx of this group of globalist contenders—Internationalists, as they are frequently called—bring with them invaluable experience in government, in intergovernmental relationships, and in the rarefied art of international politics. Their bent is toward the development of new and ever wider interrelationships between the governments of the world. Their aim is to foster increasing cooperation on an international basis—and to do that by maintaining the peace, at the same time they accomplish what war has rarely achieved: the breakdown of all the old natural and artificial barriers between nations.

  In the current competition to establish and head a one-world government, Transnationalists and Internationalists can be said for all practical purposes to act as one; to constitute one main contender. The Genuine Globalists of the West. Both groups are products par excellence of the system of democratic capitalism. Both are so closely intertwined in their membership that individuals move easily and with great effect from an Internationalist to a Transnationalist role and back again. And not least important in the all-encompassing confrontation that is under way, both groups share the same philosophy about human life and its ultimate meaning—a philosophy that appears, in the surprised view of some observers, to be closer to Mikhail Gorbachev’s than to Pope John Paul’s.

  There is one great similarity shared by all three of these geopolitical competitors. Each one has in mind a particular grand design for one-world governance. In fact, each of them talks now in nearly the same terms Karol Wojtyla used in his American visit in 1976. They all give speeches about an end to the nation system of our passing civilization. Their geopolitical competition is about which of the three will form, dominate and run the world system that will replace the decaying nation system.

  There is at least one other similarity among these groups that is worthy of note, primarily because it leads to misunderstanding and confusion. And that is the language each group uses to present its case to the world.

  All three contenders use more or less the same agreeable terms when propagandizing their individual designs for the new world order. All three declare that man and his needs are to be the measure of what those individual designs will accomplish. All three speak of individual freedom and man’s liberation from want and hunger; of his natural dignity; of his individual, social, political and cultural rights; of the good life to which each individual has a fundamental right.

  Beneath the similarity of language, however, there lies a vast difference in meaning and intent; and greatly dissimilar track records of accomplishment.

  The individual in Gorbachev’s new world order will be someone whose needs and rights are determined by the monopolar government of Leninist Marxism. Indeed, all individual rights and freedom and dignity are to be measured by the needs of the Party to remain supreme and permanent.

  In the new world order of the Wise Men of the West—the most powerful of the Genuine Globalists—the rights and freedoms of the individual would be based on positive law: that is, on laws passed by a majority of those who will be entitled to vote on the various levels of the new system of governmental administration and local organization. Ultimate rule, however, will be far removed from the ordinary individual.

  The primary difficulty for Pope John Paul II in both of these models for the new world order is that neither of them is rooted in the moral laws of human behavior revealed by God through the teaching of Christ, as proposed by Christ’s Church.
He is adamant on one capital point: No system will ensure and guarantee the rights and freedoms of the individual if it is not based on those laws. This is the backbone principle of the new world order envisaged by the Pontiff.

  Similarities of public rhetoric, therefore, do more to mask than clarify the profound differences between the contenders, and the profoundly different consequences for us all of the grand design each one proposes for the arrangement of our human affairs.

  The three are contenders for the same prize; but they are not working in the vacuum of a never-never land. No one of them expects the others to change. Mr. Gorbachev knows that his Western competitors will not renounce their fundamental democratic egalitarianism or cease to be capitalists.

  The capitalists, meanwhile, know Gorbachev is a hard-core, convinced Leninist; his goal is the Marxist “Workers’ Paradise”—however he may now configure that fearsome Utopia.

  Similarly, neither of these contenders expects Pope John Paul to renounce his Christian optic on the world of man or cease to be Roman Catholic in his geopolitical strategy.

  Indeed, so definitive is the cleavage and distinction among the three that each realizes only one of them can ultimately be the victor in the millennium endgame.

  When he spoke in 1976 of “a test of two thousand years of culture and Christian civilization,” Karol Wojtyla was as aware as any human being could be that the pre-Gorbachev Soviets of the East and the Globalists of the West remained frozen in their political, economic and military stalemate.

  Never mind that the Leninist-Marxist empire of the East was slowly deteriorating to the point of falling in on itself in shattered ruins.

  Never mind that the West was bound to its treadmill of democratic egalitarianism, hard put to maintain its position but without any forward movement possible.

  Never mind that countless nations were caught in the grinding maw of the East-West stalemate. Some countries in the West, and most in the Third World, paid the price of helpless pawns. They found themselves caught up in surrogate wars; in hopeless famine and want; in plots to destabilize the governments and economies of countries and of entire regions. Even imprisonment of whole nations was not too much to bear.