As was noted in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos between 1996 and 2003 and has been repeated endlessly on this site since it launched on February 20, 2004, the Calvinist-Judeo-Masonic world of Modernity is premised the following false premises:
(a) that it is possible for men and their nations to pursue the common good by their own unaided powers;
(b) that material prosperity is the sole measure of personal success and national greatness;
(c) that men have the right to exercise an unfettered freedom of speech and press without regard for Divine Revelation and/or without regard even to objective truths in the Order of Creation;
(d) that human sentiment and utilitarian necessity are the standards of law and morality.
Theses premises have created a contemporary world containing the following characteristics:
(a) that elections must be controlled by political parties composed of career politicians who, at least for the most part, are concerned solely the acquisition and retention of civil power;
(b) that the citizenry, distracted by the bread and circuses represented by partisan politics, lack the interest and do not have the attention span to understand that the real decisions shaping their lives are made by lobbyists for corporate interests which provide campaign cash and perquisites for elected officials;
(c) that the establishment of the career civil service and then the welfare state permitted an oligarchy of unelected officials to serve as the permanent government that is accountable to no one and able to make decisions about the lives and property of private citizens by virtue of administrative procedures established by Congress’s abdication of its constitutional duties;
(d) that “public education” is a tool of ideological propaganda designed to condition young people to accept the dictates of the high priests and priestesses of Modernity without complaint; (e) that a supposedly “free press” can report the “news” from that same ideological perspective to reinforce the direct and subliminal messages taught in America’s concentration camps;
(f) that it is necessary to surrender national sovereignty to a variety of globalist entities, each of which has its own administrative ruling class accountable to no one which does the bidding of Judeo-Masonry;
(g) that national borders are archaic and that foreign nationals must be permitted free access to other nations without regard to those nations’ national security, public health and political stability;
(h) that “freedom of religion” means freedom from religion, especially the true religion, Catholicism—not conciliarism, in the public “square”;
(i) that medical care must be premised on the acceptance of contraception, surgical and chemical abortions, the homosexualist agenda, “brain death,” “vital organ donation” and so-called palliative care;
(j) that parents have no Natural Law rights to educate their children as they see fit;
(k) that pharmaceutical companies have a right to exercise a virtual monopoly on so-called “remedies” and that natural means to heal bodies and to cure diseases and chronic conditions must be suppressed;
(l) that corporations and internet providers have the right to violate the privacy of people to track their every move, if not their every word, spoken or written, and to condition people to purchase what is displayed in pop-up screens;
(m) that the masses, lulled to sleep by lives of relative ease and convenience, will accept robots and other means of “artificial intelligence,” including the implantation of the “chip” into their own bodies, to create a race of people who do whatever the “chip” or robot commands;
(n) that natural disasters are the result of “global warming” and not a manifestation of God’s just chastisement upon men for their sins.
This is a somewhat comprehensive summary of life created in the wake of the triumph of Calvinism and Judeo-Masonry since Martin Luther’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King five hundred years ago.
Nonetheless, however, this site exists to help readers to see the world through the eyes of the true Faith as it is easy to become agitated and distracted over the conflicts that are designed by the adversary to keep people from reflecting on root causes of problems, starting with the social effects of their own sins.
Father Edward Cahil, S.J., writing in the Irish Ecclesiastical Review eighty-eight years ago, provided his own list of what the scions of Judeo-Masonry hoped to accomplish in the world:
The immediate aim of the practical policy of Freemasonry is to make its naturalistic principles effective in the lives of the people; and first of all to enforce them in every detail of public life. Hence its political and social programme includes:
(1) The banishment of religion from all departments of government, and from all public institutions; and as a mark of the triumph of this policy, the removal of the Crucifix and all religious emblems from the legislative assemblies, the courts of justice, the public hospitals, the schools and university colleges, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 156-157.)
It is very telling that conciliar revolutionaries, who have enabled the "leftists" of the civil state in a particularly blatant manner since the "elction" of Jorge Mario Bergoglio on Wednesday, March 13, 2013, have applauded these “developments” as most of their own colleges and universities have divested themselves of official control of what is purported to be the Catholic Church and have removed the Crucifix and other religious emblems from most of their classrooms. Formerly Catholic hospitals have done the same. Indeed, many of them, participating fully in the medical industry’s manufactured, money-making myth of “brain death” (see ObamaDeathCare), have merged with secular corporations. And most Catholics in public life are fully supportive of various evils under cover of the civil law, and none of them is reprobated by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who, quite instead, praises those of them that he meets as “servants of the poor.”
To return to Father Cahill’s enumeration of the Judeo-Masonic program:
(2) The secularization of marriage.
(3) The establishment of a State system of so-called education which, at least in its primary stages, will be obligatory and conducted by the laity.
(4) Complete freedom of worship (at least for all except the true one.) (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 157.)
Absent the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His Catholic Church, men and their nations must fall into the abyss. Those who think that the perversity represented by so-called “gay marriage” has brought us to rock bottom are quite mistaken. Polygamy and “marriage” to children are the next frontiers in the path of “civil freedom” according to the logic of Judeo-Masonry. Total debauchery thus must be enshrined under cover of the civil law and promoted and celebrated throughout what passes for “popular culture.”
Pope Leo XIII had made a similar point in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, forty-five years before Father Cahill’s articles appeared in the Irish Ecclesiastical Review:
Doctrines [Modern doctrines on the separation of Church and State and civil liberty] such as these, which cannot be approved by human reason, and most seriously affect the whole civil order, Our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs (well aware of what their apostolic office required of them) have never allowed to pass uncondemned. Thus, Gregory XVI in his encyclical letter "Mirari Vos," dated August 15, 1832, inveighed with weighty words against the sophisms which even at his time were being publicly inculcated-namely, that no preference should be shown for any particular form of worship; that it is right for individuals to form their own personal judgments about religion; that each man's conscience is his sole and allsufficing guide; and that it is lawful for every man to publish his own views, whatever they may be, and even to conspire against the State. On the question of the separation of Church and State the same Pontiff writes as follows: "Nor can We hope for happier results either for religion or for the civil government from the wishes of those who desire that the Church be separated from the State, and the concord between the secular and ecclesiastical authority be dissolved. It is clear that these men, who yearn for a shameless liberty, live in dread of an agreement which has always been fraught with good, and advantageous alike to sacred and civil interests." To the like effect, also, as occasion presented itself, did Pius IX brand publicly many false opinions which were gaining ground, and afterwards ordered them to be condensed in summary form in order that in this sea of error Catholics might have a light which they might safely follow. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
As we know, the conciliar “popes” have endorsed that which our true “Roman Pontiffs (well aware of what their apostolic office required of them) have never allowed to pass uncondemned.” The conciliar “popes” have “reconciled” with the principles of Modernity. A future such “pope” explained this in his own words thirty-five years ago:
Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 382.)What happened in 1789?
Wasn't there some kind of anti-Theistic revolution in France, the elder daughter of the Church? What did Pope Leo XIII write about such reconciling with the principles of the revolution just a year before he promoted the Bishop of Mantua, Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto, to be the Patriarch of Venice?
Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)
This applies as much to the conciliar revolutionaries as to the lords of Modernity as they, the conciliar revolutionaries, have shown their utmost respect for all religions while showing their contempt for the true one instituted by God Himself. The religion of conciliaism is Judeo-Masonic pantheistic naturalism.
Pope Saint Pius X always understood the schemes of the enemies to make the civil state the true secular “church” as the only means of human happiness and advancement:
In August 1896 in Padua, the second Congress of the Catholic Union for Social Studies took place. We have already seen that this organization had been created seven years before by Professor Giuseppe Toniolo, in the presence of the Bishop of Mantua [Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto]. This time, eight bishops were present and several directors of the Opera del Congressi took part. All the eminent representatives of the Italian Catholic Movement were present (Medolago Pagnuzzi, Alessi and others). Cardinal Sarto's address attracted considerable notice. Faced with "ardent enemies" (unbelief and revolution) "...menacing and trying to destroy the social fabric," the Patriarch of Venice invited the participants to make Jesus Christ the foundation of02/ their work: "the only peace treaty is the Gospel." He warned them against what is now called the "welfare state," the state which provides everything and provides all socialization: "substituting public almsgiving for private almsgiving involves the complete destruction of Christianity and it is a terrible attack on the principle of ownership. Christianity cannot exist without charity, and the difference between charity and justice is that justice may have recourse to laws and even to force, depending on the circumstances, whereas charity can only be imposed by the tribunal of God and of conscience." If public assistance and the redistribution of wealth are institutionalized, "poverty becomes a function, a way of life, a public trade..." (Yves Chiron, Saint Pius X: Restorer of the Church. Translated by Graham Harrison. Angelus Press, 2002, p. 100)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the epitome of everything condemned by the Bishop of Padua, the future Pope Saint Pius X, one hundred twenty-one years ago. Bergoglio embraces every pro-abortion, pro-perversity, Marxist-leaning or outright Marxist public official, whether elected or appointed, on the face of the earth, including the egregious pro-abort, pro-perversity globalist statist named Edmund G. (Jerry/Space Cadet) Brown, Jr. the Governor of the People’s Republic of California (see Vatican Extols Pro-Abortion Governor Jerry Brown as a True Leader Who Defends Human Dignity). The social teaching of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, replete as it is with a Marxist-Leninist deification of the poor and of the state’s role in “assisting” them—to stay in poverty and under their collectivist thumb, that is, is in perfect accord of the goals of globalists, who are really Marxists in green clothing. (Somewhere in the files of The Wanderer is a column I wrote twenty-three years ago, “When Green Is Red,” about environmentalism as a cover for Marxism.)
Temptations to Develop Rooting Interests for Two Sides of the Same Naturalist Coin
There is a firm alliance between the likes of former President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro’s Marxist “community organizers” and the counterfeit church of conciliarism, which is why no one should in the least be surprised by the as of yet unsubstantiated allegation in Dictator Pope that “Pope Francis” laundered the Peter’s Pence donations that had been made by the American conciliar “bishops to the Vatican and then directed them into the coffers of the presidential campaign of former First Lady/former United States Senator/former United States Secretary of State Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton in 2015. How can there be any doubt in the minds of any “conservative” Catholic that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a Marxist who equates innocent human life in the womb with the earth, plants and animals? (See, for example, "He Speaks Like A Leftist", Jorge Plays Tag Team With George Soros and Comrades and Attack Dogmatic Truth, Open the Doors Wide for George Soros.)
The existence of an alliance, which is pretty much out in the open and in everyone’s face, between the conciliar revolutionaries and leftists in the United States of America and everywhere else in the world should not, however, blind believing Catholics into ignoring the fact that the man who is hated by this alliance of evil, President Donald John Trump, is anything other than another manifestation of the triumph of the Judeo-Masonic spirit in the United States of America.
Although there is the natural temptation to develop a “rooting” interest in the farce that is American electoral politics and governance, the truth of the matter is very simple: those who are not for Christ the King will always put self-interest above the national interest. This is true of almost everyone in the false opposite of the naturalist “right,” which features many cowardly careerists who are nothing other than the bought-and-paid-for stooges of corporate lobbyists, and, obviously everyone in the false opposite of the naturalist “left” as statists have a vested self-interest in maintaining and expanding statism and its international counterpart, globalism, which are but two sides of the same Marxist-Leninist coin.
It is with this in mind, therefore, that one must understand that despite some important measures, some of which will be discussed below in summary form, that the Trump administration has taken, there have been the usual “head fakes” taken by Republican administrations that appear to fulfill campaign promises but are replete with “fine print” that make render such actions devoid of any real substance.
Also not to be counted as “good” is the very flawed “Mexico City” policy that was restored by the Trump administration on January 23, 2017 (see Sober Up, part nine) or the continuation of Federal funding for Planned Barrenhood, which, thankfully, is now under investigation by the United States Department of Justice for its sale of fetal body parts from the babies butchered at their chop shops (see U.S. Department of Justice Investigating Planned Barrenhood for Sale of Babies' Bodily Organs) and other such “family planning” agencies, most of which would have continued to receive full funding under RyanCare even if they killed babies surgically in certain “exceptional” circumstances (see There Is Nothing "Pro-Life" About RyanCare).
It is also true that, the president’s often heated rhetoric notwithstanding, the globalists, led by National Security Adviser Herbert Raymond McMaster and the pro-Planned Barrenhood Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, are fully in charge of American foreign policy, aided and abetted by the pro-Iraq War General John Kelly, who is the White House Chief of Staff, and the war hawk by the name of General James “Mad Dog” Mattis, who is the United States Department of Defense. Far from extricating the United States from the wars in Iraq, which is apparently “ending” for the umpteenth time, and Afghanistan, the Trump administration actually increased American troop presence in the never-ending Afghan War (see Trump Being Swallowed Alive by the Swamp He Promised to Drain.)
Indeed, President Trump seems so determined to refortify the swap with swamp creatures that he has nominated a globalist advocate of open borders, Kirstjen Nielsen, who is a firm supporter of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that scoffs at the integrity of this country’s borders and thus its legitimate national secure interests. Mrs. Nielsen, who is a protégé former President George Walker Bush and his brother, former Florida Governor John Edward (JEB!) Bush, carries with her the nickname of Lady DACA. It is not nothing that the level of illegal immigration has now returned to what it was in the last months of the corrupt administration of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro. Trump, who is called "DACA Don by some naturalists of the "right," has delegated so much of his actual governing powers that he is letting the swampmeisters select totally unworthy nominees to run Cabinet departments and to serve in various agencies in all too many instances.
Lest I be understood and termed yet again as “unrealistic” or that I hold up the “perfect” to be the enemy of the merely “good,” it is important to stipulate that, yes, the vulgar, profane, narcissist and materialistic naturalist, Trump, who believes that he can make “America great again” by means of economic prosperity, has done some good in the objective order of things in the first eleven months of his holding the presidency.
Although some would say that the mere fact that Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton is not president is itself good enough no matter what Trump says and does, there have been much needed rollbacks of executive and administrative overreach by previous administrations. It should be noted as well that the Federal judiciary is being staffed, at least by and large, with nominees who have some understanding of the Constitution of the United States of America and the attempt by Federal judges at all levels of the Federal judiciary to make law from the bench to circumvent the “messiness” and slow, inefficient and cumbersome legislative process is simply the way the Congress of the United States of America was meant to operate (this is specified in The Federalist, Numbers 10 and 51, each of which was authored by James Madison).
Additionally, although President Trump’s April 25, 2017, executive order concerning the odious persecution of the Little Sisters of the Poor by the Obama administration was deplorably weak (see Living Under Adversary's Rules), the United States Department of Health and Human Services did finally end the contraception mandate for all employers who have religious objections to the provision of contraception and other “family planning services” on October 6, 2017 (see Trump Administration Expected to End Rule Requiring Nuns to Fund Insurance Coverage for Contraception and other "Family Planning services").
Then again, the same Department of Health and Human Services is soon to be headed by a stooge of the Big Pharmaceutical industry, Alex Azar. That is not good, and it should be noted as well that, as has happened in the past, the little genuine good that Republican presidents accomplish with respect to protecting the innocent preborn can be done quite quickly by a successor from the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right” (see January 22, 1993, and January 22, 2009). Without the sure footing provided by a frank recognition of the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law, which have been entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for its infallible explication and safekeeping, and the Natural Law, which is explicated authoritatively by the Catholic Church, men and their nations must fall into the abyss.
Once again, therefore, let me turn to Pope Leo XIII:
The sovereignty of the people, however, and this without any reference to God, is held to reside in the multitude; which is doubtless a doctrine exceedingly well calculated to flatter and to inflame many passions, but which lacks all reasonable proof, and all power of insuring public safety and preserving order. Indeed, from the prevalence of this teaching, things have come to such a pass that may hold as an axiom of civil jurisprudence that seditions may be rightfully fostered. For the opinion prevails that princes are nothing more than delegates chosen to carry out the will of the people; whence it necessarily follows that all things are as changeable as the will of the people, so that risk of public disturbance is ever hanging over our heads.
To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
It was on All Saints Day fifteen years later that Pope Leo XIII explained the dire consequences that the world suffers from divorcing itself from the Social Reign of Christ the King:
From this it may clearly be seen what consequences are to be expected from that false pride which, rejecting our Saviour's Kingship, places man at the summit of all things and declares that human nature must rule supreme. And yet, this supreme rule can neither be attained nor even defined. The rule of Jesus Christ derives its form and its power from Divine Love: a holy and orderly charity is both its foundation and its crown. Its necessary consequences are the strict fulfilment of duty, respect of mutual rights, the estimation of the things of heaven above those of earth, the preference of the love of God to all things. But this supremacy of man, which openly rejects Christ, or at least ignores Him, is entirely founded upon selfishness, knowing neither charity nor selfdevotion. Man may indeed be king, through Jesus Christ: but only on condition that he first of all obey God, and diligently seek his rule of life in God's law. By the law of Christ we mean not only the natural precepts of morality and the Ancient Law, all of which Jesus Christ has perfected and crowned by His declaration, explanation and sanction; but also the rest of His doctrine and His own peculiar institutions. Of these the chief is His Church. Indeed whatsoever things Christ has instituted are most fully contained in His Church. Moreover, He willed to perpetuate the office assigned to Him by His Father by means of the ministry of the Church so gloriously founded by Himself. On the one hand He confided to her all the means of men's salvation, on the other He most solemnly commanded men to be subject to her and to obey her diligently, and to follow her even as Himself: "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me" (Luke x, 16). Wherefore the law of Christ must be sought in the Church. Christ is man's "Way"; the Church also is his "Way"-Christ of Himself and by His very nature, the Church by His commission and the communication of His power. Hence all who would find salvation apart from the Church, are led astray and strive in vain.
As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
Nothing can last in the unsettled firmament of a country founded on false, naturalistic, religiously indifferentist and semi-Pelagian principles. Everything must be unsettled until the lords of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” decide that their version of “settled truth” is the only one that can be the basis of social order and public law. In other words, the scions of the “left” believe that they are infallible and that those who dissent from “inarguable” truths are social heretics who have no right to be heard.
Members of the “left” are on the march, invigorated perhaps more than ever before in the past thirteen months, as a result of elections in Virginia, New Jersey and now, of course, Alabama. There is a very strong chance United States Senator Charles H. Schumer (D-New York) will be the Senate Majority Leader on January 3, 2019, and it is even possible that former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Catholic in name only by the name of Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi (D-San Francisco, California, could reclaim the speakership that she had to relinquish to former United States Representative John Boehner (R-West Chester, Ohio—remember him) on January 5, 2011, at the same time. The atmosphere would then be quite ripe to act on any recommendations made by supposedly Special Counsel Robert Mueller concerning the actions of President Trump for supposedly obstructing justice.
There is a very real possibility that the coup d’etat—and it is a coup no matter what Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who is willfully blind to the fact that Mueller has hired a gaggle of Democratic Party operatives to “investigate” a president they loathe and want to remove, protests to the contrary (see Rosenstein Stands by Mueller as Reoublicans Fume Over Insider Bias--being engineered by allies of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton will succeed. This is especially true if Republican careerists in the United States Congress decide that Trump is more of a political liability to them than they think he is presently.
All the ranting and raving about the double standard that exists in the farce of American naturalist politics can never change the simple fact that the “left” plays for keeps while the “right” plays to focus groups, fearful of offending “swing” voters or, perhaps more to the point, if they do anything to hurt the interests of those who fund their campaigns, including the same claque on Wall Street that is well-represented in the Trump administration. Naturalism produces political farce to agitate and thus distract the masses.
Moreover, when the “left” is far better and more sanctimonious about stonewalling than the “right.” The administration of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro persecuted political opponents and then lied about it (Lois Lerner and the Internal Revenue Service). They covered up the facts of Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the Uranium One scandal and the multiple violations of law committed by Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton. The former president even obtained a FISA (Federal Intelligence and Surveillance Court of Review) warrant to eavesdrop on Trump and his top aides during the 2016 election and then orchestrated an “unmasking” of the names after the election to undermine his successor.
Then again, though, President Donald John Trump has not ordered Obama/Soetoro’s FISA application to be released, leading a former Justice Department official, Andrew McCarthy, a Republican who admits that the Mueller investigation is hopelessly compromised, to write the following recently:
What the president’s champions fail to mention is that he is in charge of classified information — including classified applications submitted to the secret FISA Court. Was candidate Trump the victim of political spying? Of a weaponization by the Obama administration of the government’s intelligence-collection power, with ramifications that, thanks to the Mueller investigation, beset the Trump administration to this day? If President Trump is indeed a victim, then it just so happens that he is uniquely positioned to expose this shocking abuse of power. All he has to do is order disclosure . . . .
Mind you, we are talking here about Donald Trump: the “when attacked, never apologize, always hit back twice as hard” brawler. He has never seemed like a guy who would suffer in silence if he had the power to reveal such treachery perpetrated against him. If what happened is as bad as it is being portrayed, why are the Justice Department and FBI, under Trump-appointed leadership, stonewalling Republican-led congressional committees? After Thursday’s hearing, why didn’t the president tell Director Wray and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein that, by close of business Friday, either the FISA application should be in the House Intelligence Committee’s hands or their resignations should be on his desk?
In the unmasking controversy, it seems Trump was more interested in politically exploiting the specter of abusive unmasking than in ordering the disclosure of what actually happened. Is the same thing true of the dossier? I don’t know why the FBI and Justice Department are stonewalling the Intelligence Committee. Suffice it to say, however, that the president could order disclosure if he wanted to. He hasn’t. If he persists in that posture, we have to assume he would prefer that we not know what the FBI told the FISA Court. Read more at: Trump Should Disclose FISA Warrants)
As I have noted in the past, it is futile to expect justice from those who are personally unjust, which is the why the author of the article quoted just above, Andrew C. McCarthy III, is being more than a little naïve in his repeated contentions (Mueller Needs to Make a Change and Is the Steele Dossier the Source of the FISA Warrant Against Trump Campaign?) that just because he, a self-described “opinionated conservative” who worked as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York in the 1990s, could put aside his “personal beliefs” to act professionally in the pursuit of justice that Clintonites such as now-disgraced Federal Bureau of Investigations Agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who were shamelessly texting each other about their hatred for Donald John Trump (see The Plot To Take Down Trump) while they were committing sins against Holy Purity with each other, and Clinton lapdog Andrew Weissman, a supposedly “professional” prosecutor who has a long track record of destroying the lives of the innocent by withholding exculpatory evidence from defense attorneys and thus Federal courts (see Weissman Has a History of Bullying and Withholding Information, Critics Say), could be expected to “set aside” their own personal biases. Those who cleave to the false opposite of the naturalist “left” do not conduct themselves with disinterest as theirs is an unholy secular crusade to demonize and to delegitimize all those who are opposed to the “revealed” truths of the deep state and leftism.
Moreover, no one in the spineless pack of the careerist creatures within the ranks of the Republican Congressional leadership is going to stand up to Robert Mueller’s own lawlessness, which has been exhibited in his bludgeoning the General Services Administration to hand over ten thousand privileged and confidential e-mails that belong to the Trump Transition Team. Sure, he should be removed, something that a naturalist named Greg Jarrett has said is the appropriate legal remedy (Mueller's Allegedly Lawless Acts Have Corrupted His Probe and Demand His Removal). Who will do so? Why should men who have no regard for the laws of God have any respect the laws of mere men?
Even an investigation into the deep state biases within the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation as proposed by commentator Hugh Hewitt (Special Counsel Needs to Investigate the FBI and the Justice Department) will never root out the corruption that must exist when a nation does not recognize the Social Reign of Christ the King as it must be exercised by His true Church. Public life must be stained by crime when the minds of men are deluded into thinking that a merely secular form of public administration is “good order” to pursue justice and maintain a just social order:
A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. "If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he burneth" john xv., 6). "He that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
Rather than fight crime and criminals such as Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s then director, James Comey, probably doing the bidding of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, took the initiative (see Judge Napolitano: James Comey Responsible For Hillary Clinton Probe Statement, FBI Text Messages on Russian and Clinton Investigations and Hillary Clinton's Allies: Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, James Comey) to exonerate the former Secretary of State’s grossly negligent handling of e-mails marked confidential (Comey Edits Revealed: Remarks on Clinton Probe Were Watered Down), which makes it highly ironic that “Special Counsel” Robert Mueller is now investigating any efforts by the Trump campaign in 2016 to obtain Clinton’s e-mails from WikiLeaks (see Mueller sought emails of Tramp Campaign Data Firm). I mean, those e-mails wouldn’t have been any kind of issue if Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton had not gone to such lengths to hide them from public access via freedom of information requests by having an internet technician set up a home-brewed server in her house in Chappaqua, New York. The only kind of Russian interference in the 2016 has come in the form of efforts to aid the campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton by making it appear that Donald John Trump was a Russian stooge (Unlike Nixon, Trump Will Not Go Quietly, All of Hillay's Men and Russia Gate is Really Hillarygate.)
Moreover, FBI investigator Peter Strzok used the discredited Peter Steele “dossier” as an “insurance policy”—which is a term he used in his own conversations with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, whose wife is a Democratic Party operative, in the case that Donald John Trump defeated Hillary Rodham Clinton last year. Adherents of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” want to use Federal law and regulations and the sheer brute force of Federal law enforcement agencies as a means to agitate and thus to divide people to the point that those in the false opposite of the naturalist “left” will simply give up any effort to reverse what the “left” has accomplished. This is what has happened with the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn and with the absurdity that is “marriage” between two people of the same gender engaging in perverted acts, and it is the same methodology that the “left” is using now to wear down the “right” to force Donald John Trump’s removal from office for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Everything must fall into disorder and chaos when men are steeped in errors galore even if they are not steeped in personal vice. Injustice passing for justice must become the norm rather than the exception when legal positivism (the assertion that something is legal because it has been made thus by a legislative statute or because a law enforcement or regulatory agency says it has the power to do something even without any explicit authorization and, of course, perhaps even in defiance of their own standards of professional conduct) takes place of the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law and thus of all objective norms of law and justice.
The United States Department of Justice has become somewhat analogous to the "Ministry of Justice" in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics from its earliest days of operation. Nikolai Krylenko, who would rise eventually to the post of "Commissar of Justice" under Joseph Stalin in 1929 and served in this position until 1931, was the chief prosecutor of Moscow in 1923 during the show trial of Archbishop Jan Cieplak. It was during this unjust prosecution of Archbishop Cieplak that Krylenko made a bold pronouncement, which is contained in the following paragraph about the persecution of Christians by the Soviets:
Krylenko, who began to speak at 6:10 PM, was moderate enough at first, but quickly launched into an attack on religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular. "The Catholic Church", he declared, "has always exploited the working classes." When he demanded the Archbishop's death, he said, "All the Jesuitical duplicity with which you have defended yourself will not save you from the death penalty. No Pope in the Vatican can save you now." As the long oration proceeded, the Red Procurator worked himself into a fury of anti-religious hatred. "Your religion", he yelled, "I spit on it, as I do on all religions, -- on Orthodox, Jewish, Mohammedan, and the rest." "There is no law here but Soviet Law," he yelled at another stage, "and by that law you must die." (Francis McCullagh, The Bolshevik Persecution of Christianity, E. P. Dutton Company, New York, New York, 1924, p. 221.)
It is also by Soviet "law" that Nikolai Krylenko died as he was executed after a twenty-minute show trial on July 29, 1938. And it is by such "law" that we are governed at this time. Anyone who believes that there is some secular way out of a mess that is the result of Protestant Revolution’s doing the bidding of Talmudists to separate Church and State, thus paving the way for Judeo-Masonry, is sadly mistaken.
In the midst of all this, though, a believing Catholic must keep in mind that the agitation engendered by these conflicts of false opposites is from the adversary. The adversary wants Catholics to believe that they have a “friend” in Donald John Trump. They have no such thing. Donald John Trump remains what he has always been, a naturalist who has been beholden to Talmudists politically and who is beholden politically to the “evangelical” and “fundamentalist” Protestant who profess “Christian Zionism.”
To Do the Bidding of the Zionist State of Israel
Well, what has all this got to do with President Donald John Trump’s decision to move the American embassy in the Zionist State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem?
This is a fair question, and I so glad that you, the inquisitive six readers who still access this website, have asked it. Permit me an opportunity to posit an answer.
Actually, the part—and I will admit that it is only a part—of the possible legal jeopardy that President Donald John Trump may face from the extremely biased, out-of-control investigation of “Special Counsel” Robert Mueller (see Did FBI and Justice Department Plot to Clear Hillary Clinton and Bring Down Trump? and Co-Dependents of the Independent Counsel) has to do with the fact that former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn’s having pled guilty to lying to agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation concerning two meetings he had with the Russian Ambassador to the United States of America, Sergey Kisylak, one year ago this month.
The first of those meetings took place on Thursday, December 22, 2017, the Feast of Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini, and the second took place a week later, that is, on Thursday, December 29, 2017, the Feast of Saint Thomas a Becket and the Fifth Day in the Octave of Christmas. The subjects of those meetings were described in the following report:
Flynn admitted in his plea that he lied to the FBI about several December conversations with Kislyak. In one, on Dec. 22, he contacted the Russian ambassador about the incoming administration’s opposition to a U.N. resolution condemning Israeli settlements as illegal and requested that Russia vote against or delay it, court records say. The ambassador later called back and indicated Russia would not vote against it, the records say.
In another conversation, on Dec. 29, Flynn called the ambassador to ask Russia not to escalate an ongoing feud over sanctions imposed by the Obama administration, court records say. The ambassador later called back and said Russia had chosen not to retaliate, the records say.
Flynn admitted as a part of his plea that when the FBI asked him on Jan. 24 — four days after Trump was inaugurated — about his dealings with the Russians, he did not truthfully describe the interactions. But perhaps more interestingly, he said others in the transition knew he was in contact with Kislyak.
Flynn admitted that before speaking with the ambassador, he called a senior transition official at the Mar-a-Lago resort on Dec. 29 “to discuss what, if anything, to communicate to the Russian ambassador about the U.S. Sanctions” and learned that transition members did not want Russia to escalate the situation. And when the ambassador later informed him Russia would not retaliate, Flynn told senior members of the transition team, court records say. The senior transition official is not identified in records, but people familiar with the matter said it is K.T. McFarland, who is now nominated to be the U.S. ambassador to Singapore. (Michael Flynn Charged With Making False Statements to the FBI.)
What has mystified most observers thus far is why retired General Michael Flynn would lie about meetings that were (a) not illegal in the slightest and (b) known by the National Security Agency to have taken place. There has got to be a reason why General Flynn, who is a native of Rhode Island (his late mother, Helen Francis Flynn, was very active in pro-life circles in the Ocean State when he was a teenager in the 1970s), lied about the meetings and their substance when question by FBI agents on January 24, 2017.
Additionally, General Flynn, who is hated by the globalist crowd because of his firm desire to protect American sovereignty, has promised to cooperate with Robert Mueller’s so-called “investigation.” Although there has been a great deal of speculation concerning what knowledge, Flynn, has concerning President Trump and those within his inner circles, the following report from a Russian source, Sputnik, builds a plausible case that the December 22, 2016, meeting with Sergey Kisylak, who is now the Russian Ambassador to the Republic of Moldova, was undertaken at the initiative of Jared Kushner, the Kabbalist who is married to Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump Kushner, who converted to Talmudic Kabbalism because of him:
But then you have a final point where Flynn is asking Kislyak to assert his authority to have Russia veto a United Nations resolution condemning Israel for settlement activity [in the West Bank] — a resolution that Obama planned to abstain from and allow to pass as kind of a final act of disrespect] to [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu.”
The resolution, UN Security Council Resolution 2334, condemned the building of Israeli settlements in the West Bank as a "flagrant violation" of international law. Fourteen of the 15 members of the Security Council voted in favor of the resolution, including Russia. Only one state, the US, abstained.
"We learned that Flynn was acting here on behalf of Jared Kushner, the presidential son-in-law who is also the son of Charles Kushner, a longtime friend of Benjamin Netanyahu whose family foundation has funded Israeli settlements," added Blumenthal. "He has basically helped support the political empire of Benjamin Netanyahu for years — in fact, when Jared Kushner was a teenager, he'd have to get up and leave his bedroom when Netanyahu was in town because Netanyahu would stay literally in his bed with his family when he was on trips to New York.”
So this relationship with Netanyahu is what all the Israeli government drew on to turn the Trump transition team into its own personal vehicle to attempt to attack Barack Obama and the sitting American administration. This is as clear a case of collusion against an American president with a foreign power that I've ever seen in my life, and we're hearing not dead silence, but it's being treated as business as usual." (Flynn-Kislyak Conversation on Israel.)
Admittedly, the story above is from a Russian source. However, it is a known fact that Jared and Ivanka Trump Kushner have a special, vested interest in providing every manner of assistance to the Zionist State of Israel. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that Jared Kushner might have urged Flynn to have been less than candid about the meetings that he, Kushner, wanted Flynn to have to Sergey Kislyak a year ago this month. Kushner himself was not candid, at least not at first, in the representations he made on a form to disclose his contacts with foreign officials (see Kushner Updated Disclosure to Add More than One Hundred Foreign Contacts.)
Again, this would be mystifying as it is not uncommon for incoming administrations to have contact with representatives of foreign nations, although it is unusual—but not entirely unprecedented—for there to be direct efforts to oppose the outgoing administration’s policies. When it comes to the Kushner and the Zionist State of Israel, however, one can count on the unusual as usual.
Support for the Zionist State of Israel, which was founded by displacing the Palestinian Arabs who have lived there for centuries by their forcible removal from their homes and placed into “detention camps” simply for living on lands they owned for generations, is a cornerstone of the Kushners’ entire belief system, and these two smooth operators have been very successful in exploiting the sort of “Christian Zionism” that exists in “evangelical” and “fundamentalist” Protestant circles that was described as follows by Father Louis J. Campbell, the pastor of Saint Jude Shrine in Stafford, Texas:
Since the time of the Apostles, the Holy Catholic Church has preached the Gospel by the authority granted it by Jesus Christ. The Church was preaching the Gospel years before the Four Gospels were written down, and has continued to this day to fulfill Our Lord’s command to “preach the gospel to every creature” (Mk.16:15).
The Church collected the Scriptures that make up the Bible. But the heretic, Martin Luther (1483-1546), weeded out some of the books of the Bible he didn’t like, and the Protestant version of the Bible was born. The Bible itself was then touted as the sole authority subject to the “private interpretation” of the believer, thus denying the Church’s authority to preach the Gospel and interpret the Scriptures. However, it seems “the believers” are willing to believe much that is not to be found in the Bible.
No doubt many of us are puzzled by the strange phenomenon of Christian Zionism. Many Evangelical Christians, like the Baptists, the Pentecostals and the Charismatics, are enthusiastic supporters of Jewish Zionism, although not all Jews are Zionists, and many of them dispute the Zionist claims.
The Jewish Zionist Movement was founded by Theodor Herzl in 1897. Its chief aim was the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the “Land of Israel” in the Bible. The Temple would eventually be rebuilt, and the ancient religious rites resumed. Since they believe they have a right to the lands promised to Abraham by God, the Zionists have little sympathy for the Palestinians, who were squeezed into the West Bank and the Gaza strip after the creation of the Jewish State of Israel in 1948. Misusing Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish Zionists believe they are destined to rule the world.
So what could have turned famous Protestant preachers like Billy Graham, Hal Lindsay, John Hagee and Pat Robertson, into Christian Zionists, enthusiastic supporters of the aims of Jewish Zionism? Could it have been – the Scofield Bible?
The Scofield Reference Bible is widely used in Protestant seminaries, especially among Evangelicals, such as Baptists, Pentecostals and Charismatics. Recently someone sent me an article by a Mr. C.E. Carlson about the Scofield Bible, which seems to get to the root of the problem. Much of what follows is from Mr. Carlson (http://www.serendipity.li/zionism/carlson01.htm).
One of the schemes of the Jewish Zionists was to alter the Christian view of Zionism by creating and promoting a pro-Zionist subculture within Christianity. One Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) was funded by Zionist agents to re-write the King James Version of the Bible by inserting Zionist-friendly notes in the margins, between verses and chapters, and on the bottoms of the pages. It was first published in 1909 by Oxford University Press, which still holds the copyright.
Scofield produced a revolutionary book that radically changed the context of the King James Version. Oxford's promoters made the Scofield Bible, with its Christian Zionist footnotes, a standard for interpreting scripture in Christian churches, seminaries, and Bible study groups. And they all followed like sheep – even Hagee, Lindsay, Robertson, Van Impe, and the revered Billy Graham. So much for private interpretation!
After Scofield’s death, the Oxford University Press turned the Scofield Bible into a manual for the Christian worship of the State of Israel. Scofield’s un-Christian anti-Arab theology has permitted the theft of Palestine and 54 years of death and destruction against the Palestinians, with hardly a complaint from the Judeo-Christian mass media evangelists or most other American church leaders, including the so-called U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
In his Epistle to the Galatians, St. Paul contradicts the claims of the Scofield Bible:
“The promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. He does not say, ‘And to his offsprings,’ as of many; but as of one, ‘And to his offspring,’ who is Christ… For you are all the children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all who have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor freeman; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are the offspring of Abraham, heirs according to promise” (Gal.3:15b,16;26-29).
This makes it clear that to be a blood relative descended from Abraham is of no advantage to those who do not have faith in Jesus Christ. And Scofield and the Oxford University Press are liars when they try to prove that those who are known today as “Jews” are the heirs to the promises of Abraham. We read this whopper on page 1136 of the 1967 edition: “All Jews are natural descendants of Abraham…”
This is absolutely false and absurd. The great majority of the so-called Jews who control Israel today are not descendants of Abraham at all. They are the Ashkenazi Jews, descendants of the Khazars of Eastern Europe. They are imposters, with no right to the lands of the Bible! Although known as “Jews” they are such neither by blood nor by religion, because the Jewish religion their ancestors adopted in the eighth century is not the true religion of the ancient Jews of the time of Christ, but the false Talmudic Judaism which blasphemes Jesus Christ and deifies the Jewish race.
And on page 19 we find this blatant lie: “God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram’s seed… to the Nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever.
What a deception! The televangelists and their huge following have accepted this abominable lie, and have led the whole country into vassalage to the Godless modern State of Israel. Jesus Christ is Abraham’s heir, not the State of Israel. The promises God made to Abraham are fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The Jewish Zionists have no true understanding of the Scriptures. And who would have thought that the “Bible believing Christians” would have stumbled after them into the darkness?
“Did you never read in the Scriptures,” said Our Lord to the Pharisees: “‘The stone which the builders rejected, has become the corner stone; by the Lord this has been done, and it is wonderful in our eyes’? Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and will be given to a people yielding its fruits” (Mt.21:42,43).
St. Paul understood it well:
“You are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ Jesus himself as the chief corner stone. In him the whole structure is closely fitted together and grows into a temple holy in the Lord, in him you too are being built together into a dwelling place for God in the Spirit” (Eph.2:20-22). (Father Louis J. Campbell, Seventh Sunday after Pentecost.)
The notion that the people who threw out the Palestinians from their homes and dispossessed them of their belongings as many of them were herded into the Zionist equivalent of concentration camps, termed euphemistically as "relocation camps," in 1948 and thereafter represent the Abrahamic Jews of the Old Testaments is false. Most of those Jews who settled in Palestine between the two world wars and after World War II are not descendents of Abraham nor are they Jews by blood. Most of these modern day Talmudists are descendants of the Asiatic Khazars who converted to Talmudism:
Jesus Christ is the Great Prophet foretold by Moses, Whom all nations and peoples must hear and obey, lest they be "destroyed from among the people." Jesus was not a mere prophet, like Moses, Jeremiah, or Isaiah. In Jesus there resided the prophetic gift in all its fullness. When God speaks, we must listen in fear and trembling (cf. Isaias 66:5).
Though they have rejected the Great Prophet, the Jews still think that the promises made to Abraham are theirs, and that all the lands promised to the ancient Israelites are theirs by right, and will be theirs in fact. This means that no one else who occupies these lands, be they Palestinians, Lebanese, or whatever, have any rights, and that they can be dispossessed of the lands they have occupied for millennia. The ancient Israelites, whose heirs they imagine themselves to be, were commanded by God to exterminate the Philistines, were they not? And who are the descendants of the Philistines? Why, the Palestinians and the Lebanese, of course! Their rights can be ignored with impunity.
Then there are those of the Christian Fundamentalist Right in the Unites States, the Christian Zionists, who support Israeli claims, egged on by such false prophets as Jerry Falwell, Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, and John Hagee. Thousands of evangelical Christians recently arrived from all 50 states in Washington, where they have enormous political influence, for the first annual summit of Christians United for Israel, Hagee being the main organizer.
For the first time in the history of Christianity in America," Hagee said, "Christians will go to the Hill to support Israel as Christians." They will urge the US government "not to restrain Israel in any way in the pursuit of Hamas and Hezbollah… We want our Congress to make sure that not one dime of American money goes to support Hamas and Hezbollah or the enemies of Israel."
Then Hagee declares: "When they see what's going on in the Middle East, a whole range of enemies arrayed against God's people, they see God's word being played out on their television sets. They see Israel triumphing over its enemies as proof that God's promises remain" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/5193092.stm).
It is as if Jesus Christ never came and established a New Covenant in His Blood, and founded the Holy Catholic Church. God's promises were fulfilled in Jesus Christ and in those who follow Him. Hagee, and those like him, have an Old Testament theological viewpoint, and have betrayed Jesus Christ, in Whom the Scriptures are fulfilled. Who are God's people but those who have believed in His word and obey His commands, whether Jews or not? According to St. Paul, "There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor freeman; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are the offspring of Abraham, heirs according to promise" (Galatians 3:28,29).
The Jews are children of Abraham according to the flesh only, natural descendants. Some of them, that is. Are those whom we call Jews today the descendants of the Jews who were dispersed among the nations after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D., or even of the ten tribes that were carried off into captivity by the ancient Assyrians in 721 B.C.? On the contrary, most Jews today are the so-called Ashkenazi Jews, descended from the ancient Khazars of Eastern Europe. Despite their prominence in the Jewish community they do not have Jewish blood, but were converted to Judaism in the ninth century. They do not have Jewish blood, and they follow the modern Jewish Talmudic religion. How does that make them "God's people," and the "inheritors of the promises"?
On May 14, 1948, on the day in which the British Mandate over Palestine expired, the Jewish People's Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum and declared the establishment of the State of Israel. The new state was recognized that night by the United States, and three days later by the USSR. The Vatican, out of concern for the safety of the Holy Places and the rights of the Palestinians, many of whom are Catholic, did not recognize the modern state of Israel until John Paul II, fervently pro-Jewish, gave it official Vatican recognition on April 20, 1984.
Contrary to what the Jewish Zionists expect, they will not reign as masters of the world from Jerusalem. The servile nations will not come to Mount Zion bearing gifts. Pray for the Jews! They will be all but exterminated except for the remnant who will turn to Jesus Christ and be saved.
And contrary to what the Christian Zionists expect, the Temple will not be rebuilt, and 144,000 Jews will not be converted to reign with Jesus Christ from the Temple in Jerusalem for a thousand years. (Father Louis Campbell, "And I Saw No Temple Therein". For a listing of John Hagee’s anti-Catholic statements over the years, see Hagee In His Own Words)
Yes, the notion of the current "Talmudists" as the Jews of the Old Testament is entirely invented.
The Zionist State of Israel is entirely invented out of the fantasies of Theodore Herzl, the founder of International Zionism, to relocate the Talmudists in the very land from which the actual descendants of Abraham were expelled by the Romans in 70 A.D. as God used the pagan Romans as the instrument to chastise the Jews for their obstinate refusal to accept the preaching of the Gospel in their midst after He had mercifully permitted them a thirty-seven year period of reprieve following their role in calling down the Most Precious Blood of Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, upon them and their children. God expelled the Jews from the Holy Land in 70 A.D., and they were not meant to return, certainly not to found a nation based in a false, blasphemous religion, less yet to do so by violent means and the constant use of raw terror and the murder of countless thousands of innocent Palestinian Arabs, both Christians and Mohammedans, thus engendering an endless cycle of hatred and violence.
It is with this in mind that one must understand that President Donald John Trump’s long-anticipated decision to move the American embassy in the Zionist State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem can receive the support of no believing Catholic. Although the Zionist State of Israel exists, this does not mean that it has any right from God to exist or that it has any legitimate claim on the City of Jerusalem—the City of the House of David, which belongs exclusively to Christ the King and His true Church.
Here is an excerpt from the president’s announcement of the pending embassy move:
Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital. Acknowledging this as a fact is a necessary condition for achieving peace.
It was 70 years ago that the United States, under President Truman, recognized the State of Israel. Ever since then, Israel has made its capital in the city of Jerusalem -- the capital the Jewish people established in ancient times. Today, Jerusalem is the seat of the modern Israeli government. It is the home of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, as well as the Israeli Supreme Court. It is the location of the official residence of the Prime Minister and the President. It is the headquarters of many government ministries.
For decades, visiting American presidents, secretaries of state, and military leaders have met their Israeli counterparts in Jerusalem, as I did on my trip to Israel earlier this year.
Jerusalem is not just the heart of three great religions, but it is now also the heart of one of the most successful democracies in the world. Over the past seven decades, the Israeli people have built a country where Jews, Muslims, and Christians, and people of all faiths are free to live and worship according to their conscience and according to their beliefs.
Jerusalem is today, and must remain, a place where Jews pray at the Western Wall, where Christians walk the Stations of the Cross, and where Muslims worship at Al-Aqsa Mosque.
However, through all of these years, presidents representing the United States have declined to officially recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. In fact, we have declined to acknowledge any Israeli capital at all.
But today, we finally acknowledge the obvious: that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. This is nothing more, or less, than a recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do. It's something that has to be done. (Trump Statement on Jerusalem.)
This is not the right thing to do.
Zionists and anti-Zionist Talumdists have no claim on Jerusalem.
Mohammedans have no claim on Jerusalem.
Jerusalem belongs to Christ the King and His true Church, the Catholic Church. No one else.
Protestants reject this, of course, and the “Christian Zionists” among them who gave such strong electoral support to Donald John Trump in 2016 expressed great delight in the president’s decision to move the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The aforementioned anti-Catholic bigot named John Hagee said the following on the very misnamed “Christian Broadcasting Network” (CBN):
"What President Trump is doing is one of the most courageous political things that's been done in Washington in a long time," Hagee, who is also the senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, told CBN News.
Many presidents have promised to move the embassy and declare Jerusalem as the eternal capital, but they have promised without performing," he continued.
"President Trump, when I spoke to him in the White House about this several weeks ago, he said this very emphatically. He said, 'Other presidents have failed you, but I will not disappoint the Christian community in this issue. I will stand with Israel, and we will at some point in time, move the embassy,'" said Hagee.
He also talked with the president about the significance of moving the embassy in this "Jubilee Year."
"...I told him that God measures everything in modules of 50 years," Hagee explained to CBN News. "And I said this is a principle that's carried out in Leviticus, the 25th chapter."
"I said, 'If you look at 1917, it was a Jubilee Year, and the Balfour Amendment came, and then in 50 years, it was 1967, and Jerusalem was reconnected to Israel,'" he continued.
'And you add 50 to 1967, and you're in 2017.' I said, 'This is the year to move the embassy and make that declaration because it is a biblical timing of absolute precision,'" Hagee said. "Thank God, he's going to do exactly that."
Meanwhile, CBN's Gordon Robertson says that Trump's move for Israel was long overdue from America's leaders.
And Hagee also emphasized the significance of the Jewish state to God and why Christians need to acknowledge its global importance.
"...I believe at this point in time, Israel is God's stopwatch for everything that happens to every nation, including America, from now until the Rapture of the Church and beyond," he said.
"Christians should care about Israel because the entirety of the Bible beginning at Genesis all the way to the end is God's position paper on the Jewish people," Hagee explained.
"God found a man by the name of Abraham and He made a covenant with him," Hagee continued. "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, recorded in the book of Genesis, that He was going to give them a strip of real estate in the Middle East, and that piece of real estate would be theirs forever."
"Forever means today, tomorrow and forever," he said. "It has nothing to do with what the Palestinians think, what the Russians think, what the UK has the opinion of; it belongs to the Jewish people."
"And Israel is the gateway to God's blessing in the Bible," Hagee continued. "Genesis 12: 'I will bless those who bless you.'"
"World history can be summed up in one sentence. The nations that blessed Israel were blessed of God, and the nations that cursed Israel were cursed of God," he said. (Laugh of the Day: Anti-Catholic Bigot John Hagee Praises Trump Decision on Jerusalem.)
John Hagee, who rejects Sacred (Apostolic) Tradition as a source of Divine Revelation, knows as much about Sacred Scripture as Donald John Trump knows about the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America. Nothing.
The New Zion is the Catholic Church, not the Zionist State of Israel.
God Himself took the Holy Land away from the Jews when He used the pagan Romans to expel them in the year 70 A.D.
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ prophesied the destruction of Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem, a destruction that is symbolic of the of the salvific power of Judaism, which has belonged to the kingdom of satan ever since (see the passages from Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton's The Catholic Church and Salvation contained in Jerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Chuch, part two that was published eight months ago):
And Jesus being come out of the temple, went away. And his disciples came to shew him the buildings of the temple.  And he answering, said to them: Do you see all these things? Amen I say to you there shall not be left here a stone upon a stone that shall not be destroyed. (Matthew 24: 1-2.)
Our Lord prophesied that there “shall not be left here a stone upon a stone that shall not be destroyed,” which should teach us that the so-called Western Wall is not part of Solomon’s Temple as modern Jews contend (it is a retaining wall for the courtyard on the Temple mount, not for the Temple itself, which was destroyed, stone upon stone) but another false representation made by those who believe that they remain the Chosen People, which they do not.
An unnamed official in the Trump administration, however, accepts the Zionist propaganda about the Western (Wailing) Wall, and said that no “peace” settlement could be made that did not include the wall as part of the Zionist State of Israel:
The Trump administration “cannot envision a scenario” under which the Western Wall, “would not be part of Israel” in a future peace agreement with the Palestinians, a senior official said on Friday.
The official underscored the point in a briefing with reporters in advance of this week’s visit to Israel by US Vice President Mike Pence.
The trip has been hampered by a crisis with a Palestinian Authority already livid over US President Donald Trump’s recognition earlier this month of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
“We cannot envision any situation under which the Western Wall would not be part of Israel,” the official said.
“But as the president said, the specific boundaries of sovereignty of Israel are going to be part of the final-status agreement.”
Trump was the first US president to visit the Wall in an official capacity during his May trip to Israel. The administration official said that, similarly, Pence would visit the Western Wall in his role as vice president.
The PA denounced the latest US statement about the Western Wall.
The Palestinians will not accept any changes to the pre- 1967 lines in east Jerusalem, Abbas’s spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh said according to Wafa, the PA news agency.
In pronouncing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital on December 6, Trump said that his administration made no judgment on who will control which parts of the city in a final agreement. Israel insists that all of Jerusalem remain its undivided and eternal capital, while the Palestinians demand a state of their own with its capital in the city’s eastern districts.
“This American position proves once again that the current US administration is completely out of the peace process,” he said.
“Continuing with this American policy – whether it has to do with recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the US embassy to the city or taking a unilateral decision on final-status issues – is in violation of international law and consolidates the occupation. This is not acceptable to us and we denounce it,” Abu Rudeineh said. (Western Wall Is Part of Israel, Unnamed Trump Official Says.)
So much angst over a wall that was never part of Solomon’s Temple! Ah, angst, anger, confusion and even violence must follow in the wake of the adversary’s plan to spread falsehood to take place of the Gospel of the Christ the King as It has been entrusted to and taught infallibly by the authority of the Catholic Church.
Father George Leo Haydock’s commentary on verse two of the twenty-fourth chapter of the Gospel according to Saint Matthew explains the falsity of the Jewish contention that the Western (Wailing) Wall has anything to do with Solomon’s Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans. in its entirety. It was, to use a favorite phrase of a friend of ours, leveled. Ironically, it was the Jews themselves who destroyed a few remnants of the Temple’s wall in the Fourth Century as they did the bidding of Julian the Apostate to try to produce false archeological evidence to debunk Our Lord’s prophecy:
Ver. 2. Do you see all these things? Examine again and again all this magnificence, that the sentence of heaven may appear more striking. --- A stone upon a stone. We need not look on this as an hyperbole. The temple burnt by the Romans, and afterwards even ploughed up. See Gregory of Nazianzus, orat. ii. cont. Julianum; Theodoret, lib. iii. Histor. chap. xx. &c. (Witham) --- Julian the apostate, wishing to falsify the predictions of Daniel and of Jesus Christ, attempted to rebuild the temple. For this purpose, he assembled the chief among the Jews, and asking them why they neglected the prescribed sacrifices, was answered, that they could not offer any where else but in the temple of Jerusalem. Upon this he ordered them to repair to Jerusalem, to rebuild their temple, and restore their ancient worship, promising them his concurrence in carrying on the work. This filled the Jews with inexpressible joy. Hence flocking to Jerusalem, they began with scorn and triumph to insult over the Christians. Contributions came in from all parts. The Jewish women stripped themselves of their most costly ornaments. The emperor opened his treasures to furnish every thing necessary for the building. The most able workmen were convened from all parts; persons of the greatest distinction were appointed to direct the work; and the emperor's friend, Alipius, was set over the whole, with orders to carry on the work without ceasing, and to spare no expense. All materials were laid in to an immense quantity. The Jews of both sexes bore a share in the labour; the women helping to dig the ground, and carry away the rubbish in their aprons and gowns. It is even said that the Jews appointed some pick-axes, spades, and baskets, to be made of silver, for the honour of the work. Till this time the foundations and some ruins of the walls had remained, as appears from St. Cyril, in his catechism xv. n. 15, and Eusebius, Dem. Evang. lib. viii. p. 406. These ruins the Jews first demolished with their own hands, thus concurring to the accomplishment of our Saviour's prediction. They next began to dig a new foundation, in which many thousands were employed. But what they had thrown up in the day, was, by repeated earthquakes, the night following cast back again into the trench. When Alipius the next day was earnestly pressing on the work, with the assistance of the governor of the province, there issued, says Ammianus Marcellinus, such horrible balls of fire out of the earth near the foundations, as to render the place inaccessible from time to time to the scorched workmen. And the victorious element continuing in this manner obstinately bent, as it were, to drive them to a distance, Alipius, thought proper to abandon, though reluctantly, the enterprise. This great event happened in the beginning of the year 363, and with many very astonishing circumstances is recorded both by Jews and Christians. See the proofs and a much fuller account of this astonishing event, which all the ancient fathers describe as indubitable, in Alban Butler's life of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, March 18th. Thus they so completely destroyed whatever remained of the ancient temple, that there was not left one stone upon another; nor were they permitted by heaven even to begin the new one. (Maldonatus) (Haydock Commntary.)
So much for the “fake news” and absolute hoax that is the “Western Wall” as being anything other than yet another means for the contemporary practitioners of a dead, superseded religion to lay claim to that which belongs to Christ the King and His true Church that He Himself founded upon the Rock of Saint Peter, the Pope, and to force the conciliar “popes” and dupes such as Trump and Vice President Michael Richard Pence, who is visiting the Zionist State of Israel this week, to do their obeisance in front of this hoax.
Alas, it should come as no surprise that many there is a phenomenon as “Christian Zionists” as Talmudists were in the vanguard of undermining the Faith throughout the Middle Ages and played a particularly important role in bringing about Martin Luther’s revolution against the Divine Plan that Our Lord Himself instituted to effect man’s return to Him through His true Church that is responsible, proximately speaking, for the triumph, although only transitory, of Judeo-Masonic naturalism in the world.
William Thomas Walsh’s Characters of the Inquistion summarized the decisive role of Talmudists in bringing about and then propagating the Protestant Revolution to overthrow the Social Reign of Christ the King an eradicate the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from public view:
During the spectacular and fateful reign of Charles the Fifth, the Spanish Inquisition became so inactive that its enemies began to take its early death for granted. Charles, who was elected German Emperor soon after becoming King of Spain, and while still a youth crowned an extraordinary good fortune by marrying the most beautiful woman in Europe, seemed too powerful a monarch to have to worry about a few heretics here and there; moreover, he was by nature trusting, tolerant and magnanimous to such a degree that Cervantes has been suspected of drawing a sublime caricature of him in Don Quixote. Masters of the new World, whose gold came by galleons to Sevilla, he was always in need of money and dependent upon the favors of usurers. Lover of peace, he was always fighting, now defeating Francis I at Marignano, now performing the prodigies of a paladin in Africa, now warring against traitorous barons in Germany and Austria. Lover of Christ and of the Catholic Faith, he saw through the fallacies of Luther; yet he made fatal compromises (his famous Interim, for example) which permitted Lutheranism to pass from the sectarian to the political plane, and so to destroy the unity of Christian Europe for centuries; and he heard with shame, in 1527, that his armies composed in great measure of German Lutherans and of secret Mohammedans (Moriscoes) from eastern Spain, had sacked Rome, besieged and all but killed the Pope, and filled the capital of Christendom with the horrors of butchery, rape, and desecration even of the Blessed Sacrament. Charles considered himself the great champion of the Church, and was sincerely anxious for the reform of existing abuses against which the Lutherans in the north were clamoring, yet he allowed his aunt, Catherine of Aragon, to be cast aside for a royal concubine by Henry VIII, as a prelude to the crafty destruction of the Catholic Faith in England; and he saw his rivalry with Francis I constantly prevent and finally interrupt, the deliberations of the Council of Trent, which alone could restore health and discipline to the human organization of the Church. A cool and skillful statesman, a keen judge of men and motives, and on the whole, a better man than either Francis or Henry, he was in the main outwitted from first to last by more subtle and unscrupulous individuals. At a time when Europe needed a man of single purpose, a Saint Fernando, a Saint Louis, a Catholic Moses, to insist always that the soul of western civilization was the Christian Faith, on which, in the nature of things no compromise was possible, there were two conflicting men in this Habsburg potentate: an ascetic and a sensualist. During the lifetime of his wife, to whom he was faithful apparently until her death, he promised her that when their son Philip was old enough to rule, they would retire from the world, to a monastery, she to a convent, to meditate and pray. After the death of the Empress Isabel, however, circumstances seemed to demand that he retain his power; and the animal in him, which had always manifested itself in his huge feeding and drinking, gained the ascendance for a time. By one of his mistresses, the blond termagant singer Barbara Blomberg, he begot Don Juan of Austria, about the time when he was advising his legitimate son and heir, Philip, to live chastely, and to beware of politicians who would seek to gain influence over him through the wiles of women. The contrast was characteristic, and it continued to the end. An old man at forty-nine, he handed over the government of Spain to Philip, and retired to the monastery at Yuste to prepare for death, to flagellate himself for his sins, to curse at choristers who sang off key, to gorge himself with meat and wine and then to pay with spasms of the gout, as the dregs of his earthly life seeped miserably away.
Charles seemed unaware, most of his life, that he was surrounded by the agents of an international conspiracy to destroy everything that his heart loved and revered. Most of his councillors were Catholics in name only, or very lax Catholics; many of them, in key positions, were of Jewish descent. Charles saw no danger in this. His favorite chaplain was doctor Constantino Ponce de la Fuente, an eloquent preacher whose voice is said to have had something like the effect of music on his congregations, and whose book on Christian doctrine (dedicated to the Emperor, who read it faithfully) gained him a great reputation as a theologian – though at the very time her was in secret communication with Lutherans in Germany, and had two wives living. The chief minister of Charles, the wily Gattinara, had adopted principles of Erasmian heretics then industriously undermining Catholicism in Spain, while Erasmus himself, alarmed at the turn events were taking, was denouncing Luther. Even Alonso Marique, the Inquisitor General, was said to have Erasmian tendencies. The Emperor intervened to save Juan Gil, who was secretly propagating anti-Catholic doctrines at Alcala, from the Inquisition; and he wanted to make him bishop of Tortosa. Another court preacher in high favor was the secret Protestant, Father Augustin Cazalla. Michael Servetus was secretary to the Emperor's confessor, Juan de Quintana. Propagandists were at work to draw the whole Imperial family away from the Church Catholic. Charles's brother Fernando remained faithful in his rather stupid way; but their sister Mary of Hungary was a Lutheran for a time; and Fernando's son Maximillian (who later became Emperor) was notoriously Protestant in his views and in his friends. Even the children of Charles were in grave danger of perversion. Some one skilfully suggested that young Philip II take as his confessor the great Doctor Constantino; but Philip, warned against the man, chose some one else. Philip's sister Maria (later Empress) was not so wary. Her confessor was Fray Vincente de Rocamoro, who later threw off the mask of Catholicism and joined the Hebrew community at Amsterdam as Isaac of Rocamoro.
The Expulsion of the Jews from Spain had been only a temporary misfortune for that energetic and resourceful race. Already, in various parts of the world, they had built up new political and commercial empires. Even before the Spanish calamity, their control of international trade, and of almost the entire economic life of Europe, had been broken by the organization of the medieval Catholic workmen's guilds: but they had gone a long way toward repairing the misfortune, and scattered from Spain and Portugal, were soon controlling the overland trade between the West and Indies, at Ferrrar, Venice, Ancona, Salonika, Constaninople, Cairo and Suez. A Portuguese Jewish family names Mendes, with relatives in Spain, the Netherlands and England, formed a powerful syndicate which became known as the Spice Trust, whose owners collected toll on goods consumed in every country in Europe, maintained an elaborate intelligence or spy system, indulged in usury on a vast scale, gradually pushed into the background such Catholic bankers as the Fuggers, and threw the huge weight of their wealth and influence on the side of any movement aimed against the Church of Christ. Joseph Mendes, one of the spice magnates, went to Constantinople and there became virtually master of the policy of the Sultan; it was he, for example, who instigated the great threat to Christendom which was stopped by the fleet of Don Juan of Austria at Lepanto. All the powers of international Jewry were allied with, if not actually the motive power of, the vast conspiracy which produced the Protestant revolt. In fact, it was the famous Battle of the Books, a dispute over the Jewish Talmud and Kabbala, which set the stage for Luther. Erasmus's friend Reuchlin, the defender of the Jewish books, assembled around his a party of revolutionaries without whose instant support the Augustinian monk’s voice might have had no more effect than Huss's or Segarelli's. Once the landslide began, the wide-spread wealth and power of Talmudic Jewry was organized behind the new movements in England, Germany, and France, and probably gave them their permanence. International finance gave the Protestant Revolt a world capital at London. Many good things came to an end: medieval hospitals and charities; the unity of Europe; the Catholic guilds of workmen, from which the modern labor movement still has much to learn.
Charles apparently had no insight into the real significance of all this revolution that was going on around him and in his very household. For many years he retained a pathetic belief in the efficacy of physical force and, even more, of political intrigue. As he had compromised with the Lutheran movement in Germany, so he attempted to outflank the Anglican position by compromise and finesse. He arranged for Philip (whose Portuguese wife had died) to marry Mary Tudor, with the hope that they would have a son who would inherit both England and Spain, and thus bring England back into the Catholic fold. This in part was to be Philip's recompense for having lost the Empire. The whole international anti-catholic ring had seen to it that the Imperial succession would pass not to the Spanish prince, whose unyielding devotions to the Catholic Church was well know, but to his cousin Maximillian, whose lukewarm Catholicism was believed to mask a Protestant heart. Philip, however, would still be the most powerful ruler in Christendom: he would have, besides England and Spain, the control of Italy through Milan and Naples; Burgundy, the Low Countries, and the New World. The recovery of England would make the victory over Protestantism decisive.
This beautiful dream dissolved in the light of actuality. Charles and his obedient son made the fatal mistake of not following the advice of the Pope and Cardinal Pole on the restoration of the immense properties of the English Church, stolen by Henry VIII and passed on by him to crafty upstarts who supplanted the ancient nobility. These men, under the skillful and unscrupulous leadership of William Cecil, were resolved at all costs to suppress the Catholic worship in England, for the sake of the loot they held. They were so cowed at the accession of Mary that a bold stoke then might have forced them to restore the monastery lands and other properties to the rightful owners. But Charles and Philip advised Mary not to insist too much on the point; counting, of course, on the birth of a Catholic heir, and the healing effects of time. The heir was not born, however, and time proved unfaithful. When Mary died without issue, Philip felt sure that her bastard sister Elizabeth would keep her oath to be a good Catholic if crowned. It had been within his power to exclude her; he even toyed with the idea, doubtless with encouragement by Elizabeth, that he could marry her if he chose, and thus keep England within his hand. Philip did not know that William Cecil had secretly arranged matters with Ann Boleyn's daughter, and would control her by his powerful will, and the weapon of fear, for nearly all her life. She had hardly been crowned when she broke her oath, revealed herself a Protestant, and made Cecil her chief minister. Thus Philip, with the best of intentions, and it must be admitted, as victim of his father's opportunist policies, had set up a power which would become the rallying point of the new Protestant world, shield the ancient hatred of the Catholic Church, and plague him to the day of his death. Thanks to his father's political advisers, too, he had been drawn into a costly and foolish war with Pope Paul IV, who on his side was deceived by a scoundrelly nephew; and it was a sorry satisfaction when the Spanish troops under the Duke of Alba, took Rome.
Charles, meanwhile, on returning to Spain to prepare his soul for death, had had more than one rude awakening. With no Ximenes beside him to give wise and disinterested advice, the prematurely old Emperor was shocked especially to learn that while he had been neglecting the Inquisition founded by his ancestors, and making clever compromises with the heretics of Germany and England, Lutheranism had not only appeared, but had made considerable headway, in Spain.
Even after the reforms of Ximenes, there was some danger that an anti-Catholic movement might take hold in Spain. The reforms of the great Cardinal had not yet permeated the secular clergy. Also, among the large population of Catholic Jews there were still some who were waiting for any opportunity to embrace a cause which called itself Christian (without demand the Christian test of sincerity in the confessional) and yet was a solvent of true Christianity. Finally Erasmus had sown the seeds of dissidence. This Voltairian individual, this versatile mediocre man with far more knowledge than wisdom, this sickly misbegotten dispeptic who had an almost irrational hatred of monks because his uncle had forced him to enter an Augustinian monastery, and jeered at Crusaders among whom his puny limbs could never have taken a place, became immensely popular in Spain at the beginning of the siglo de oro. He had done some good works on pagan and Christian antiquities, and in patrology; he was ski;lful in polemics; above all, he attacked clerical abuses at a time when it was fashionable all over Europe to do so. He went even further: he ridiculed rites and ceremonies of the Church, and scoffed at some of her sacred dogmas. He despised such warrior Popes as Julius II (whom Moses would have understood better) and could not find words enough to flatter the Medici Popes, Leo X and Clement VII, under whose pontificates occurred two of the greatest calamities that had befallen the Church: the loss of Germany and the loss of England. His Praise of Folly contained in embryo all of Luther's subsequent attack, and even ridiculed texts of Holy Scripture. Good men were taken in by him, believing him to be a sincere Catholic seeking needed reforms. Saint Ignatius began reading his works on the advice of his confessor: but on noticing his fervor and devotion began to ebb away in proportion, he cast away the book he was reading, and thereafter held all the writings of Erasmus in abhorrence. Juan de Vergaro, thought he had been a secretary to Cardinal Ximenes, was less sensitive to spiritual odors; he obtained a Spanish pension for Erasmus. Neither wholly Catholic or wholly Protestant, this mean-spirited scholar withdrew from the abyss in which Luther had walked, while his disciples became pioneers of the New Religion in England, and even in Spain.
To understand the shock of horror with which the Emperor Charles discovered all this in 1558, just before his death, one must consider circumstances often omitted or overlooked in the modern conspiracy (When I use “conspiracy” in this sense, I do not mean necessarily a plot controlled by one man, or a small group: it suffices to notice that men of the same spiritual affinity tend toward a common end) against truth which has poisoned the records of the English-speaking world, but painfully real to men of the time. England, more than ninety per cent Catholic, was quietly taken in hand by a small rich minority of enemies of the Catholic church, many of them, like Cecil, of very obscure origin. In France, leagued with the English Protestants, another small but rich minority of Calvinists, chiefly nobles and usurers, were beginning the formidable plots which were to lead to the eight bloody Huguenot Wars. These two groups had very intimate connections with the Lutheran princes of Germany, and with William of Orange, who was already laying the groundwork for the Protestant revolt in the Low Countries, and urging the Turks, through Jewish bankers friends who were his heavy creditors, to attack Catholic Spain from the Mediterranean. Not all of this was evident in 1558, but enough of it had come to light to make the last nights of the Emperor very restless indeed. And then to find out that a Lutheran plot was well advanced in Spain – !
Perhaps the Spanish, having fought the battles of Christendom against unbelief so many centuries, had a keener awareness that some of their northern neighbors of the significance of such movements. They had learned that in this world appearances are often deceptive. A Dominican theologian, familiar with the recent activities of the Alumbrados, discovered by the agents of [Cardinal] Ximenes [de Cisernos], and aware of the ideas of the medieval Manichee heretics from which they derived, would not be long in stripping the gospel of Luther of its accidents, which gave it the superficial appearance of something new, and fining in its essentials the same old enemy that the Catholic Church had been fighting so many centuries. Luther professed to be appealing from the Middle Ages to the virgin purity of the first Christian centuries. In reality he was leading the minds of his victims even further back in time, back, in the labyrinth of ideas, to the gospel of despair so elaborately disguised by the bhikkus of India, and so craftily revived by the Beghards, Beguins and other secret societies of the thirteenth century.
“Escape from the evils of life (Karma), from desire and action, into nothingness,” said the Buddhists in effect. “Join us, look within, and sink into pure contemplation. Once desire is dead, you shall be free from sin, rebirth and misery.”
“Life is evil, the work of the devil,” said the medieval Manichees. “Do not listen to Pope or priest, but join our sect of the Pure and the Perfect: then, no matter what you do, you are free from sin, from the torment of conscience, from the evil of living.”
“Be illuminated by a divine feeling from within,” said the Alumbrados. “Obey no one but God, Once you have become perfect and left desire behind, no carnal act you happen to perform can be sinful.”
“No human works are of any avail,” said Luther. “Only faith can save you. If you have faith, it does not matter how much you sin; in fact, the more you sin the more you prove your faith. Therefor be a sinner, sin strongly, sin a thousand times a day.”
Was not Luther's doctrine of salvation by grace alone a restatement, with a somewhat different emphasis, of the old despairing dogma of the Alumbrados, the Manichees, the Gnostics, the Buddhists? Did not he and Melancthon, in the name of reform revive that other heresy of Fraticelli: the detestable error that the state had absolute power over the individual and the Church that the State was the supreme judge and master of human affairs: there was a familiar Manichean smell about all this Lutheran business, and in the nostrils of the Dominicans it was not good.
Spain had a reminder of the implications of Illuminism in 1544, when the Inquisition, in one of its few moments of activity under Charles V, astonished the country by arresting the famous beata, Sister Magdalena de la Cruz, who had been a nun for forty years at the convent of Saint Isabel of the Angels in Cordoba, and had had such a reputation for holiness that even members of the royal family went to solicit her prayers, while the Empress Isabel, wife of Charles V, gave her in gratitude the robe in which her son, Philip II, had been baptized. It was said that the saintly woman performed dreadful penances and vigils, that she lived only on the Host received in Holy Communion, and that she had received the stigmata of Our Lord on hands, feet and side.
Under examination by the Dominican inquisitors, however, Sister Magdalena made some very different revelations. She admitted that she was not a Catholic at all, but one of the sect of the Alumbrados; that when seven years old, she had been persuaded by the devil to pretend sanctity; that at eleven she had made a pact with two demonios incubos, named Balban and Pitonio, who used to have intercourse with her by night, disguised in various ways – now as a Jeronymite friar, now as a Franciscan, now as a black bull, now as a camel. In obedience to them she made wounds on her hands, feet and side so cleverly that even holy persons were deceived; she went into “trances” in which she seemed insensible even to the prick of needles, she imposed even upon princesses and the Empress.
The Inquisition imprisoned this foul impostor for life. Yet her evil mission had a certain measure of success even after her death. Her example made good people afraid of all who manifested any of the phenomenon to which she laid claim; so that when Saint Teresa of Avila experienced real raptures and visions, she was suspected by pious persons of being just one more Magdalena of the Cross, and endured unspeakable persecutions in consequence, even after the Inquisitors declared her free from heresy and deception, and a true mystic.
Whether Magdalena was an impostor, a paranoiac, a lunatic, or one possessed, is beside the point here. It was intolerable that such a person should be allowed to represent the Catholic religion and impose upon the Catholic people. It was one of the functions of the Holy Office to protect the faithful from such deceptions; and although Luther was a very different sort of person from the nun of Cordoba, there was a certain similarity between his doctrine and that of the secret society to which she belonged. They too, used Christian terminology, though with esoteric meanings; they spoke of “contrition for sin,” “the cross of the Christian,” “the warmth of the Holy Ghost” and so on; and all their emphasis was on feeling as opposed to reason, and on private judgment as opposed to the authority of an ordered Church. (William Thomas Walsh, Characters of the Inquisition, New York, P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1940 pp. 214-223.)
This describes Jorge Mario Bergoglio just as much as the “Christian Zionists” who are such enthusiastic supporters of President Donald John Trump, especially after his decision to relocate the American embassy in the Zionist State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem over the course of the next several years.
William Thomas Walsh’s commentary about the work courageous work of Francisco Cardinal Jiménez de Cisneros, known by contemporaries as Ximens de Cisernos, to root out Jewish infiltration of the Church in Spain to spread the errors of Luther makes it very clear how Jewish saboteurs have long sough to take down Holy Mother Church and thus to discredit and supplant her role in civil society:
The Dominicans, Augustinians and Carmelites did not resist. It was his own community that gave him one of the great battles of his life. After the death of Saint Francis, as we have seen, that order passed through a hectic period, at the end of which when peace had been restored through the efforts of Saint John Capistrano, there still remained two divisions, the Conventuals, who took the easier road for human nature to follow as regarded property and other matters, and the Observatines, who sought to follow the ideal of Saint Francis in all its rigor. Ximenes himself a member by choice of the latter group, put all Franciscans in Spain under the direction of the Commissary General, and then proceeded to reform them. The Conventuals were furious; many of them, in fact, were good men sincerely convinced that their modified rule was better than the original one. The dispute reached such a stage of acrimony that an Italian Franciscan General went to Spain purposely to put an end to the reform, spoke insultingly to Queen Isabel in his anger, and evoked from her a memorable rebuke, while Gonzalo de Cetina, secretary for Aragon, threatened to hang the distinguished visitor with the cord of his habit. Such strong representations were made at the Vatican that Alexander VI, in 1496, ordered the housecleaning suspended, but the following year, being better informed, he allowed it to go on. Ximenes carried on the war to victory. He had the satisfaction of learning that a thousand bad monks had given up the struggle in Castile, and had migrated to Morocco, where they might live as they pleased – some of them taking along women with whom they had given scandal. The Church and Spain were much better, of course, for their departure; and although Ximenes never completed his task with the secular clergy, he had carried the movement so far that when he died the boast was made, with justice, that the Spanish monks were noted beyond all those of Christendom for temperance, chastity, and virtuous living in general. In the course of time, the improved state of the monasteries had its effect upon the secular priesthood. It was probable the reform of Ximenes, therefore that saved Spain from succumbing, after his death, to Protestantism. Unlike his English contemporaries, he proved that monks could be brought back to discipline without cutting off their heard, destroying their works of mercy and handing over their lands to usurers.
Every heretical movement had two important elements: (1) a protest, usually exaggerated but with more or less foundation in fact, against abuses arising from the weaknesses of human nature in the Church; and (2) a conspiracy, often cloaked by some sort of secret society, to pervert the teachings of Christ and the Church, under pretext of reform. Ximenes had forestalled the first of these conditions in Spain. He also did a great deal to expose and prevent the second. It was while he was Inquisitor General, for example, that the sect known as the Alumbrados or Illuminates was first discovered in the Peninsula.
Nothing in history is without cause and without effect. The Alumbrados were a link in the chain of causality connecting the Manichees of the Middle Ages with modern anti-Christian movements; the Inquisition of Toulouse with the French Revolution and the Bolshevik Revolution.
The name Iluminado first appeared in Spain when a report sent to Cardinal Ximenes concerning the activities of one Fray Antonio de Patrana, who had begun to preach a revelation which he said came to him directly from God, called himself Illuminatus, and went about the countryside with certain holy women, on whom he had been instructed, by the inner voice he followed, to beget prophets. The Inquisition clapped him into prison, and scattered his sect.
Obviously, he was a spiritual descendent of those Fourteenth Century imposters Segarelli and Dulcinus. It was no new cure that he dispensed. Nor was Illuminism but a distortion of Christian mysticism, any more than it was a perversion of Judaism. True it made its way into the Christian Church under the guise of various heresies, as it deceived many of the scattered children of Moses under the covers of the Talmud; but in reality it was quite different in origin. The Law of Moses and the Law of Christ came from God, from the source of being, of good, of light, of growth; when free to do so they always produced orderly and beautiful living. And both of them were opposed, from very early times, by a totally different spirit, the spirit than denies, that hates life, that causes confusion and chaos. This dark spirit enthroned itself in the East, even before the Incarnation; and there shielded by a singularly pure and austere code of morality, it evolved systems of thought which took on the appearances of religions, but were in reality elaborate form of atheism. Is not the Nirvana of the Buddhists, the goal of all their strivings thought countless reincarnations, nothing but the death and annihilation of the individual conscience, the extinction of human personality in an All which is but a step from Nothing? Buddhism, the child of pantheistic Brahminism, is atheism in disguise; and granting all that may be said for Buddha's good intentions, the sincere and self-sacrificing lives of many of his followers, and the truth of many of their teachings, the system itself contained the seeds of intellectual and spiritual degeneration. Out of it came a pseudo-mysticism based upon such conceptions as these: life is not worth living, personality is a burden and a curse, marriage is a bed of hot coals leading to the propagation of an evil, all labor and effort are useless, the family and other forms of society therefore become pointless, anarchy thus follows logically, and man can do no better than escape from the penalties of Karma and the chains of human desire into a cold and selfless (but actually selfish) absorption into Nirvana. Pure contemplation, to these mystics, meant that the soul lost its individuality and annihilated itself as it sank into the infinite essence, until at last it arrived at a state of perfection which was soul, there could be no sin.
These ideas underwent many fantastic transmutations as they traveled from the dying East to invade the living West. But the dangerous corollary that to the pure all things are pure, that nothing a perfect soul may do in the ectasy of contemplation can be sinful, persisted in the teachings of several heresies. It was taught by the early Gnostics, by Plotinus, by the Priscillians in Galicia, by the thirteenth century Albigenses of Southern France, by thefourteenth century Beghards of Beguins in Catalonia and Leon. And now the hoary superstition of the Buddhist bkikkus (beggars) which isolated the human soul from human society, from moral good (through braking down the distinction between good and evil) and from God Himself, was reappearing under the mask of “Illuminism.” In exposing and punishing the Alhumbrados, then, Ximenes was merely resuming in Castile the battle that Eymeric had waged, more than a century before, in Aragon and Catalonia.
He was eighty years old when King Fernando died in 1516. Queen Juana was less fit than ever to reign. Her son Charles was in Flanders, where he had been brought up, and was not yet seventeen. All the old intrigues which had divided and weakened Spain in the past began to stir behind the scenes. Nobles were reaching again for power. Catholic Jews of slight orthodoxy saw a fresh opportunity to deal a blow at the Inquisition, which had fallen so heavily upon them or upon their ancestors. They offered Charles V 800,000 ducats if he would make certain “reforms” in the procedure of the Holy Office.
The young king was tempted to accept. What did the Inquisition mean to him? He had been in Spain very little, and was more of a Fleming than a Spaniard, both in looks and in training. Why not do as the Conversos suggested, and allow, among other things publication of the names of witnesses and delators?
Ximenes, who knew that the Holy Office had been the cornerstone of the resurrected Spain, the fulcrum not only of political unity and power, but of spiritual reform, wrote a memorable letter to Charles.
“Most high and mighty Catholic King, most gracious lord: The Catholic sovereigns, as your Majesty is aware, have bestowed so much care upon the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition, and examined its laws and institutions with so much prudence, wisdom and consciousness, that modifications of it are not needed, but would rather be harmful than otherwise. At the present moment such changes would fill me the more with sorrow, as they would assuredly tend to increase the defiance shown to the Inquisition by the Catalonians and the Pope. The pecuniary embarrassment of your Majesty is, I confess, very great, but certainly that of Fernando the Catholic, the grandfather of your Majesty, was greater, when the newly converted Christians offered him 600,000 gold ducats to carry on the Navarrese war. He did not accept their proposals, because he preferred the purity of the Christian religion to all the gold in the world. With all the true devotion of a loyal subject, with the zeal which I must have for the office to which your Majesty has raised me, I beseech you to open your eyes and follow the example of your Majesty's grandfather, and consent to no changes in the proceedings of the Inquisition. All the objections raised by its adversaries have before been refuted, under the Catholic kings of glorious memory. The modifications of even the most unimportant law of the Inquisition could not be made without betraying the honor of God and insulting that of your most illustrious ancestors. If this consideration has not sufficient weight with your Majesty, may it please you to recall the deplorable occurrence which has lately taken place at Talavera de la Reina, when a newly-converted Jew, who had learned the name of his accuser, searched for him and stabbed him. The hatred against these informers is indeed so great that, if the publication of their names is not prevented, they will not only be assassinated in private and public, but even at the foot of the altar. No one will be found in future willing to risk his life by similar denunciations; this would be the ruin of the Holy Tribunal, and the cause of God would be left without a defender. I live in confidence that your Majesty, my King, and Lord, will not become unfaithful to the Catholic blood which runs in your veins, but be convinced that the Inquisition is a tribunal of God, and an excellent institution of your Majesty's ancestors.” William Thomas Walsh, Characters of the Inquisition, New York, P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1940 pp. 204-207.)
Be not deceived, good readers, that is, if any are still reading this long article!
Be not deceived.
The efforts to overturn the results of the November 8, 2016, presidential election and to effect a coup d’etat against President Donald John Trump can never but never cause a believing Catholic to develop a “rooting” interest in this side show as our cause is that of Christ the King and His true Church, the cause of Catholicism, not a false nationalism and not the illusion that the current president is anything other than a wholly-owned subsidiary of one set of Talmudists as opposed to another.
Let me remind you once again of the following exchange between Theodore Herzl and Pope Saint Pius X that took place on the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle, January 25, 1904:
HERZL: Yesterday I was with the Pope [Pius X]. . . . I arrived ten minutes ahead of time, and without having to wait I was conducted through a number of small reception rooms to the Pope. He received me standing and held out his hand, which I did not kiss. Lippay had told me I had to do it, but I didn’t. I believe this spoiled my chances with him, for everyone who visits him kneels and at least kisses his hand. This hand kiss had worried me a great deal and I was glad when it was out of the way.
He seated himself in an armchair, a throne for minor affairs, and invited me to sit by his side. He smiled in kindly anticipation. I began:
HERZL: I thank Your Holiness for the favor of granting me this audience. [I begged him to excuse my miserable Italian, but he said:
POPE: No, Signor Commander, you speak very well.
HERZL: [He is an honest, rough-hewn village priest, to whom Christianity has remained a living thing even in the Vatican. I briefly laid my request before him. But annoyed perhaps by my refusal to kiss his hand, he answered in a stern categorical manner.
POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?
POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.
HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].
POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.
HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]
POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.
HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.
POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?
HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.
POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.
[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.
HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?
POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you.
HERZL: [At this point Conte Lippay had himself announced. The Pope bade him be admitted. The Conte kneeled, kissed his hand, and joined in the conversation by telling of our “miraculous” meeting in the Bauer beerhall at Venice. The miracle was that he had originally intended to stay overnight in Padua, and instead, it turned out that he was given to hear me express the wish to kiss the Holy Father’s foot. At this the Pope made no movement, for I hadn’t even kissed his hand. Lippay proceeded to tell how I had expiated on the noble qualities of Jesus Christ. The Pope listened, and now and then took a pinch of snuff and sneezed into a big red cotton handkerchief. It is these peasant touches which I like about him best and which most of all compel my respect. Lippay, it would appear, wanted to account for his introducing me, and perhaps ward off a word of reproach. But the Pope said:
POPE: On the contrary, I am glad you brought me the Signor Commendatore.
HERZL: [As to the real business, he repeated what he had told me, until he dismissed us:]
POPE: Not possible!
HERZL: [Lippay stayed on his knees for an unconscionable time and never seemed to tire of kissing his hand. It was apparent that this was what the Pope liked. But on taking leave, I contented myself with shaking his hand warmly and bowing deeply. The audience lasted about twenty-five minutes. While spending the last hour in the Raphael gallery, I saw a picture of an Emperor kneeling before a seated Pope and receiving the crown from his hands. That’s how Rome wants it.] (Marvin Lowenthal, Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 427- 430.)
Not exactly how the conciliar "popes" have spoken to the adherents of the Talmud whenever they have permitted themselves to have been treated as inferiors in Talmudic synagogues and as Talmudic choirs have sung about how the Talmudic Jews of today are "waiting for the Messiah," now is it?
Oh, no. Pope Saint Pius X sought the conversion of souls, making no accommodations to the nonexistent legitimacy of false religions. Jorge Mario Bergoglio was a regular visitor of Talmudic synagogues in Argentina and has done so as “Pope Francis” in Rome on January 17, 2017. Remember also that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI visited three of them, including one in Rome itself (see Saint Peter and Anti-Peter).
Donald John Trump, of course, has spent his entire life around Talmudists. As one who is ignorant of any kind of history, including true history, Trump’s beliefs, such as they are, depend almost entirely upon those of the people who influence him, starting with the Kushners and his Talmudic business associates. He thinks that he has acted “courageously” by announcing the eventual move of the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv. All that he has done, however, is to make good a campaign promise that was premised upon his shallow belief that support for the Zionist State of Israel is righteous and in the best interests of the United States of America and for peace in the Middle East. It is not.
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself explained the conditions under which peace will come to the Holy Land where He triumphed over the power of sin and death on the wood of the Holy Cross and made manifest His victory by rising gloriously from the dead on Easter Sunday:
At that time, Jesus said to the Scribes and Pharisees, Therefore, behold, I send you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from town to town; that upon you may come all the just blood that has been shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the just unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar. Amen I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. Jerusalem, Jerusalem! you who kill the prophets, and stone those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you would not! Behold, your house is left to you desolate. For I say to you, you shall not see Me henceforth until you shall say, Blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord! (Matthew 23:34-39.)
There will never be peace in the Middle East until everyone in that region converts to the Catholic Faith and say in unison, “Blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord!”
(A person who recommended that I appear on Crossfire in 1987 to discuss an outbreak of Palestinian-Israeli violence then was incredulous--perhaps "mortified" is a better word—when I said that I would say just that, that everyone involved had to convert to the Catholic Church, in a live appearance on television. Guess what? I did not appear on Crossfire.)
Every single bit of the Holy Land, including Jerusalem, was sanctified by the Incarnation, Nativity, Hidden Life, Public Life and Passion, Death, Resurrection and Ascension of Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King.
Let me reiterate this fact: Jerusalem belongs to Christ the King and His Holy Church, not to the Zionist State of Israel or any other entity. Period.
While Catholics must always bear themselves kindly towards all, including Jews, of course, as each person posseesses an immortal soul created in the image and likeness of God and has been redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, whether or not they know this or accept it as being true, we are always to oppose Judaism as a false religion and to oppose Zionism and the murderous, racialist policies of the Zionist State of Israel.
It is not “anti-Semitic” to be opposed to the Zionist State of Israel and “right” to exist. Even some Orthodox adherents of the Talmud, including rabbis, who are anti-Zionists and who recognize the
Father Denis Fahey, the great defender of the Social Reign of Christ the King, explained how the Talmudists use the “anti-Semite” card to tar anyone and everyone who opposes them and will not accept their false religion as valid and who dares to place into question their tortured accounts of human history:
Yet all the propaganda about that display of Anti-Semitism should not have made Catholics forget the existence of age-long Jewish Naturalism or Anti-Supernaturalism. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish Naturalistic opposition to Christ the King is keeping Catholics blind to the danger that is arising from the clever extension of the term “Anti-Semitism,” with all its war-connotation in the minds of the unthinking, to include any form of opposition to the Jewish Nation’s naturalistic aims. For the leaders of the Jewish Nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is logically to be “anti-Semitic.” (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)
These words of wisdom apply to the cultural and political legal warfare that has been waged in this country by Judeo-Masonry. Indeed, as Father Fahey quotes from Pope Pius XI:
“Comprehending and merciful charity towards the erring,” he writes, “and even towards the contemptuous, does not mean and can not mean that you renounce in any way the proclaiming of, the insisting on, and the courageous defence of the truth and its free and unhindered application to the realities about you. The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.” (Pope Pius XII, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 14, 1937) (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)
Anti-Semitism—or simple fidelity to this mission that the God-Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, gave to the Eleven before He Ascended to the Father's right hand in glory on Ascension Thursday?
And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing them they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Mt. 28: 16-20)
Today is Gaudete Sunday, the Third Sunday of Advent.
Writing in The Liturgical Year, Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., reminds us of the joy that must be ours because we belong to the Catholic Church, she who can make no terms with error any more than the likes of Saint Lucy to offer grains of incense to the false idols:
O holy Roman Church, city of our strength! behold us thy children assembled within thy walls, around the tomb of the fisherman, the prince of the apostles, whose sacred relics protect thee from their earthy shrine, and whose unchanging teaching enlightens thee from heaven. Yet, O city of strength: it is by the Saviour, who is coming that thou art strong. He is they wall, for it is He that encircles, with His tender mercy all thy children; He is thy bulwark, for it is by Him that thou art invincible, and that all the powers of hell are powerless to prevail against thee. Open wide thy gates, that all nations may enter thee; for thou art mistress of holiness and the guardian of truth. May the old error, which sets itself against the faith soon disappear, and peace reign over the whole fold! O holy Roman Church ! thou hast for ever put they trust in the Lord; and He, faithful to His promise, has humbled before thee the haughty ones that defied thee, and the proud cities that were against thee. Where now are the Caesars, who boasted that they had drowned thee in thy own blood ? where the emperors, who would ravish the inviolate virginity of thy faith ? where the heretics, who during the past centuries of thine existence, have assailed every article of thy teaching, and denied what they listed ? where the ungrateful princes, who would fain make a slave of thee, who hadst made them what they were ? where the empire of Mahomet, which has so many times raged against thee, for that thou, the defenceless State, didst arrest the pride of its conquests ? where the more modern sophists in whose philosophy thou was sent down as a system that had been tried, and was a failure, and is not a ruin ? and those kings who are acting the tyrant over thee, and those people that will have liberty independently and at the risk of truth, where they will be another hundred years? Gone and forgotten as the noisy anger of a torrent; whilst thou, O holy Church of Rome, built on the immovable rock, wilt be as calm as young, as unwrinkled as ever. Thy path through the ages of this world’s duration, will be right as that of the just man; thou wilt ever be the same unchanging Church, as thou hast been during the eighteen years past, whist everything else under the sun has been but change. Whence is thy stability, but form Him who is very truth and justice? Glory be to Him in thee! Each year, He visits thee; each year, He brings thee new gifts, wherewith thou mayest go happily through thy pilgrimage; and to the end of time, He will visit thee, and renew thee, not only with the power of that look wherewith Peter was renewed, but by filling thee with Himself, as He did the every glorious Virgin, who is the object of thy most tender love, after that which thou bearest to Jesus Himself. We pray with thee, O Church, our mother, and here is our prayer: ‘Coe, Lord Jesus! Thy name and Thy remembrance are the desire of our souls; they have desired Thee in the night, yea, and early in the morning have they watched for Thee.’ (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Volume I, Advent, pp. 201-202.)
Although Dom Prosper Gueranger did not foresee the fact that even worse sophists and heretics would arise within one hundred years of his death on January 30, 1875, his description of the glories of Catholic Church can be applied to the counterfeit church of concilarism in no manner whatsoever as the latter entity is an embodiment of sophistry and heresy that has made terms with the ancient enemies of Christ the King and all other false religions, false philosophies and social currents.
Our hope, therefore, is in Christ the King, not in political "saviours" of the "left" or the "right" nor in "conservative" "cardinals" who refuse to recognize that they have enable heresy and error, including religious liberty, separation of Church and State and false ecumenism, in their own right.
We need Our Lady's help, especially by means of her Most Holy Rosary, in these troubling times as without the graces she sends us we will be prone to view the world through the eyes of naturalism and not through the supernatural eyes of the Catholic Faith.
May we take solace in these words of Dom Prosper Gueranger about Gaudete Sunday:
There hath stood One in the midst of you, whom you know not, says Saint John the Baptist to them that were sent by the Jews. So that our Lord may be near. He may even have come, and yet by some be not known! This Lamb of God is the holy Precursor’s consolation; he considers it a singular privilege to be but the voice which cries out to them to prepare the way of the Redeemer. In this, St. John a type of the Church, and of all such as seek Jesus. St. John is full of joy because the Savior has come, but the men around him are as indifferent as though they neither expected nor wanted a Savior. This is the third week of Advent; and are all hearts excited by the great tidings told them by the Church, that the Messias is near at hand? They that love Him not as their Savior, do they fear Him as their Judge? Are the crooked ways being made straight, and the hills being brought low? Are Christians seriously engaged in removing from their hearts the love or riches and the love of sensual pleasures? There is no time to lose: The Lord is nigh!" If these lines should come under the eye of any of those Christians who are in this state of sinful indifference, we would conjure them to shake off their lethargy, an render themselves worthy of the visit of the divine Infant; such a visit will bring them the greatest consolation here, and give them confidence hereafter, when our Lord will come to judge all mankind. Send thy grace, O Jesus, still more plentifully into their hearts; ‘compel them to go in,’ and permit not that it be said of the children of the Church, as St. John said of the Synagogue: There standeth in the midst of you One, whom you know not. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Volume I, Advent, pp. 205-206.)
We need Our Lady's help to make straight the path of her Divine Son into our own souls so that, liberated from the muck and mire of competing sets of naturalists, we may focus on the joy that should be shared by everyone in the world about the fact that He has become Incarnate for us and our salvation and deigned to be born in a lowly estate on Christmas Day.
This is all the more reason to take seriously this week's Ember Days in order that we might make reparation for our sins by offering up our prayers, fasting and sacrifices to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slaves of Our Lord Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Viva La Virgen de Guadalupe!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.