March 6, 2015

The Fourth Vow

Containing the oldest version in writing that I can find so far.


Much has been made by conspiracists of the Jesuit fourth or special vow.

If you know anything about it at all, you have most likely run into the ‘vicious’ version – as I call it – which tells a tale of a vow to kill princes or kings who stand in the way of the Roman Catholic church.

The interesting thing is how few resources outside of the 20th century there are for any version, be it from the Jesuits themselves or from the anti-Jesuits.

If one finds anything at all, it is usually some hundred-year-old oppositional version (that is obviously a work-for-hire) which does not give a viable (and more importantly) viewable source for their claims other than their own text! Even a cursory search of google, if one can manage to get around the plethora of complete bullshit websites and quote-fests of illuminati/reptilian/Jesuits conspiracy theories – theory is a good term for these as they have no basis in fact – one is left with mostly sources from the 20th century.

That’s just plain odd, don’t you think?

The conspiracy theorists most often use a Tall Tale of an alleged entry into the United States Congressional record of 1913 (with lots of little details to make it look good) of a revelation of what gets called the ‘blood oath’ of the Jesuits. I’ll give you just one example found here:

The text of the Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction is meticulously recorded in the Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216).


See? Look at all those lovely details. The 62nd congress (not the 61st, you see) House Calendar nbr, Report nbr and even specific page numbers. Aha-it must be true.

Aha! It must be true!



Ah, but then, despite all this supposed meticulously sourcing, we are told this:

However, without explanation, the text was subsequently torn out of the Congressional Record, but not before it was copied word for word by several researchers, including Ian Paisley for the European Institute of Protestant Studies.


Come on…

come on!.

This is so shades of – the records were lost BUT somehow us brave souls managed to know what they said anyway – routine, its not even funny. But this one is also a ….wait for it….backdated reference as well.

warning bullhornBullshit alert.


Heck, the only way we even know of this amazing! and daring! tale of the 1913 reference, is because of spurious sources almost fifty years later.

But hey, its worse than that.

An excellent example of a quote-fest that leads nowhere (on purpose) is the use of a book called Rome Sauterraine by Charles Didier. Now, besides the fact that most of these people don’t even get the date it was published right – it was in 1848 – the book is in French! Forming a convenient blockade of most of the english-speaking world from being able to tell whether there is or isn’t a ‘Blood Oath” or ‘Extreme Oath of Induction’ in there – as is often claimed.

Here’s the real, actual book at the internet archive – and for those of you who read French? Maybe you can tell the rest of us just exactly what page this supposed oath is on. I don’t think it is in there, because I did several translations into French of colorful phrases that are supposed to be part of this oath, and then searched the book for them.

Nada. Not one. Even more damning is that the source for this book supposedly having the blood oath is the same source that tells us of this total bullshit story about derring do in the United States Congress archives of 1913!


The allegedly swashbuckler-type hero –

Adventurer - 1920s swashbuckler film


Ian Paisley

Paisley in 1972

The Protestant version of Joseph Goebbels

Dr. Joseph Goebbels - Nuremberg Nazi Rally

According to Paisley, the Blood Oath was also quoted by Charles Didier in his book Subterranean Rome (New York, 1843), translated from the French original. And Fr. Alberto Rivera, who escaped from the Jesuit Order in 1967 and died under suspicious circumstances in 1997, confirmed before his untimely death that the induction ceremony and the text of the Jesuit Oath were identical to what appeared in the 1913 Congressional Record.


Paisley wrote a book in 1966 titled: The Jesuits: Their Start, Sign, System, Secrecy, Strategy, which is now out-of-print, and may be some of his earliest work trying to spread his blood oath propaganda.

As far as the whole internet misdirection campaign, it looks like he started that right around the year 2000 – based on this web result that came up. The first one says Apr 5 2000.


If you’d like to see just how many sources are spreading the Paisley misrepresentations, just do a simple Google search like this:

“Subterranean Rome” charles didier


You can also read the whole fabricated fourth vow at the same site I have already been quoting from. Reprising this quote from that site again –

However, without explanation, the text was subsequently torn out of the Congressional Record, but not before it was copied word for word by several researchers, including Ian Paisley for the European Institute of Protestant Studies.

It doesn’t appear that this European Institute of Protestant Studies is even European at all – it was apparently founded in 1997 in Greenville, South Carolina.

This magnificent Complex, which cost £1,300,000, was officially opened on November 15, 1997, by Mr Bob Jones IV, grandson of the late Rev Dr Bob Jones of Greenville, South Carolina, to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the faithful preaching of the Gospel by the Minister and Church Moderator, Rev Dr Ian RK Paisley, MP, MEP. The Institute has 36 rooms including seminar and lecture rooms, offices and a library.

We can also tell when this particular bible-thumping and misdirection propaganda campaign first began – just after WWII had ended. Taking the year 1997 minus 50 gives us 1947.

Here’s a pic of young Ian getting going in 1946, just 20 years old, and freshly recruited to propagandize.



Ian Paisley - 1946


Considering this same Ian Paisley was involved with getting (and keeping) all the bloody conflicts going with the Irish ‘troubles’ in the United Kingdom – I’d say it is a foregone conclusion that he was actually some sort of black intelligence operative for the Nesilim slavemasters (Catholic and British).*

*See Scientology Roots – chapter 5: Actual Jewish History for who the Nesilim were.


Its a typical tactic of theirs to draw attention to something by attacking it, but attacking it in such a way that those attacks can be shot down. Thereby putting off anyone from attacking the real point, see, that’s the basic idea. Convoluted, yes, but they do so love that one. They love to derail those who correctly sense that the nastier events in the world were contrived, by getting them to have this look –

.aha forehead pastie


And then shooting them down with ‘the facts’ and raking them over the coals for even considering there is a conspiracy, hopefully forcing this undeserved look on their face –


puppydog looks.

Its a very sick game, but it is a game, remember that. For those so inclined, I found the following from the same time period as the Charles Didier book so often misrepresented. Its a book called The Novitiate, and I particularly suggest the Essay starting on p. 274. The Novitiate was published in 1846, and offers a far better discussion of the history of the Jesuits. Here’s a little taste –

I am surrounded with books of every description about the Jesuits. They have all been written with one professed object in view-TRUTH. Truth has been contemplated by all; but in how many different ways have they gazed at her charms! Some have peered with one eye, others with half an eye; some “with spectacles on nose,” others with quizzing glasses; and not a few with that vacant stare which sees nothing! It is thus with the affairs of the Jesuits….


I am no Jesuit apologist, don’t get me wrong, but neither am I some hysterical conspiracy theorist. Like the author said so eloquently above, whatever is the actual truth is better viewed directly – rather than through the warped one-eyed or half-eyed view of some supposed truth-teller.


one-eyed truth teller monacle


And that’s what led me to track down what I think is probably the oldest representation out there right now, of what the Fourth Vow – the Special Vowactually was. I wanted to see for myself. Here’s what I have for you. Regimini militantis Ecclesiae approving the Company (Society) of Jesus was issued by Pope Paul III on 27 September, 1540.

The bull consists largely of the second version of a document drawn up by the early Jesuits themselves (the so-called ‘Formula of the Institute’), summarizing the kind of religious life they hoped to lead. In 1550, Pope Julius III issued a further bull, “Exposeit debitum”, including a third version of the Formula, which had been subjected to additional revision in the light of the Society’s accumulating experience. It is this version which is still in force.

There does exist some of the text of the first Papal Bull (reiterated in Julius III Bull) in a book from 1653 called Jersualem and Babel. In that book, the reproduction of the translation of the Reminini militantis ecclesiae, was of the part concerning the fourth vow.

I found a free E-book with the original scanned pages, and here’s an easier to read PDF version of it. You can see how old something from 300+ years ago actually looks.


jerusalem and babel 1653 .jerusalem and babel 2 .jerusalem and babel 3 .jerusalem and babel 4 .jerusalem and babel 5.

Starting on page 671 of the PDF – we find The Jesuit Special Vow – sometimes called ‘the fourth vow’ because it is in addition to the three basic vows of Chastity, Poverty, and Obedience.

A plain text version follows below the images.

Note: In medieval writing, the ‘s’ often looks like an ‘f’.

. the jesuits special vow - document from 1653 .jesuits special vow 2 .jesuits special vow 3 .jesuits special vow 4 .



The Jesuites Special Vow

The Society of the Blessed name of Jesus endureth much prejudice with many men by reason of a certain Special Vow (as they call it) which they are said to make to his Holiness, over and above the Three Common Vows of Chastity, Poverty, and Obedience. It is generally conceived by Protestants, that by vertue there-of they stand obliged, upon command, and at the pleasure of his said Holiness, to attempt the life of Kings, especially those, which he hath declared to be Hereticks, or Excommunicated, to murder Princes, to embroyl and trouble States, and in a word, to plot and execute any Treasonable design whatsoever, that may advance the Popes Interest. But that the world may see how much they are wronged herein, and know, both what the substance of that Special Vow is, and what the Intent, Matter, and End of such Mission or Command from his Holiness ought to be, which they promise so presently to obey, it is here Transcribed out of the Bull or Constitution of Pope Paul the Third, by which their Order was Confirmed in the year 1540. and runnes thus.

And further we judge it expedient for our greater Devotion to the Sea Apostolik, and more full Abnegation of our own wills and pleasures, That the Professed of this Society, beside the Common band of the Three Vows, (viz. of Chastity, Poverty and Obedience) be further tied by Special Vow:

So as that whatsoever the Roman Bishop for the time being, shall command, pertaining to the Salvation of Souls, and propagation of the Faith, they shall be bound to execute the Same, without Tergiversation or Excuse, whether they shall be sent unto Turks, or unto Infidels, yea even unto those that are commonly called the Indies, or unto any other Hereticks or Schixmaticks whatsoever.

[note: Tergiversation means evasion of straightforward action or clear-cut statement ] Now what danger can arise unto Princes from such a vow as this, further then the Preaching of true Christian Catholike Faith, and the advancement of Religion is counted dangerous to their wordly Interests, unhappily setled in opposition to it The indifferent Reader may judge.


There’s a whole lot of unsaid subtext contained beneath that word whatsoever …something I will be going into in a later article as to just what came under that whatsoever. But, I will be using their own materials to do it, not some one-eyed version of things.

The truth is far good enough on this subject, it needs no embellishment, as you will see. Until then, at least now you have a halfway decent source for this Special or Fourth Vow business.




Virginia McClaughry


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Historical Research, perceptions


, , , , ,