The State of the American Union: Disorderly, Courtesy of Judeo-Masonic Naturalism and Americanism

Note had been made a week ago that President Donald John Trump’s State of Union Address to a special joint meeting of the two houses of the Congress of the United States of America on Tuesday, February 5, 2019, the Feast of Saint Agatha, was a very effective political speech. This, however, is not the same thing as saying that it was a good speech despite his impassioned plea against the late-term execution of the innocent preborn in their mothers’ wombs and even after birth and the reaffirmation of his commitment to defend the integrity of the American southern border with the United Mexican States through which thousands of illegal immigrants have been passing in unprecedented numbers recently.

We are called to view all things through the eyes of the true Faith. No believing Catholic who understands true history and Holy Mother Church’s authentic Social Teaching can do anything but wince when faced with stomach-turning Americanist, Judeo-Masonic paeans about how Americans can do “whatever it is they set their minds to doing.” No, the president did not use those exact words, true enough. However, he did say the following a short time after exalting his administration’s moving of the American embassy in the Zionist State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem (see Jerusalem Belongs To Christ the King, part one, Jerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part two, Jerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part three, and Jerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part four) as he praised a man who was a “holocaust” survivor and the “American spirit” that had rescued him from Dachau:

Tonight, we are also joined by Pittsburgh survivor, Judah Samet.  He arrived at the synagogue as the massacre began.  But not only did Judah narrowly escape death last fall, more than seven decades ago, he narrowly survived the Nazi concentration camps.  Today is Judah’s 81st birthday.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  (Sings “Happy Birthday.”)  (Applause.)

MR. SAMET:  Thank you!

THE PRESIDENT:  They wouldn’t do that for me, Judah.  (Laughter.)

Judah says he can still remember the exact moment, nearly 75 years ago, after 10 months in a concentration camp, when he and his family were put on a train and told they were going to another camp.  Suddenly, the train screeched to a very strong halt.  A soldier appeared.  Judah’s family braced for the absolute worst.  Then, his father cried out with joy, “It’s the Americans!  It’s the Americans!”  (Applause.)  Thank you.

A second Holocaust survivor who is here tonight, Joshua Kaufman, was a prisoner at Dachau.  He remembers watching through a hole in the wall of a cattle car as American soldiers rolled in with tanks.  “To me,” Joshua recalls, “the American soldiers were proof that God exists, and they came down from the sky.”  They came down from Heaven. (President Donald John Trump, State of the Union Address, Februayr 5, 2019.)   

A Sustained Comment                 

While stipulating that the murder of any innocent human being is heinous and must be punished by the authority of the civil state, the constant invocation of the misnamed “holocaust” in order to condemn anti-Semitism is a sign how much this country is in the grip of the anti-Incarnational forces of Judeo-Masonry. Enough. A two-part series of mine from late-2013 (Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two) dealt with the crimes of the Third Reich and how Catholic bishops and priests in Nazi Germany denounced them, emphasizing the simple fact that the rise of secular civil states, including the occultists and perverts in the Third Reich, is the result of the planned and systematic attack on the Holy Faith, the Social Reign of Christ the King and all public mention of the His Holy Name that was engineered and sustained by Talmudists and their allies in the Masonic lodges. To oppose Judaism as a dead, superseded religion and to oppose Zionism as the specific effort on the part of the adversary to replace Catholicism as the guiding force as a preparation for Antichrist’s One World Governance and One World Ecumenical Religion is not to be an anti-Semite.

Jews suffered in the Third Reich precisely because Jews had prepared the way for the coming of Hitler by exalting the rise of Protestantism and the subsequent rise of “religious liberty” and religious indifferentism as the means to silence all reference to the Holy Name of Jesus. Jews rejoiced that the Freemasonic Chancellor of Germany from Otto von Bismarck sought to eliminate the influence of the Catholic Church and of believing Catholics in German cultural life during the Kulturkampf that started in 1871 and lasted until 1886. Bismarck and his Jewish-Freemasonic co-conspirators had the willing assistance of “liberal” Catholic renegades, presaging the “Second” Vatican Council’s own Kulturkampf, if you will, against the “ghettoized” theology of the Catholic Church against the forces of the world, the flesh and the devil. The Kulturkampf helped to create and sustain such an environment of anticlericalism and anti-Catholicism that it was a short step from there to the eugenics programs adopted by the Weimar Republic from 1919-1933 to the more advanced eugenics, “ethnic cleansing” programs of he Nazis themselves.

Rather than accept the true facts of history, of course, professional Talmudic victimologists have used the criminal activities of the Third Reich to make Catholics feel guilty about crimes committed by occultists who hated Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ just as much as they do, demonstrating yet again that the effort to blunt any criticism of Judaism with the canard of anti-Semitism is simply an excuse for Catholics to stay silent about all Talmudic efforts to promote evil under the cover of law and to accept the Zionist State of Israel as being willed positively by God into existence.

Additionally, of course, professional Zionist victimologists sought to create a “safe” version of Catholicism that would serve as its stooge for their promotion of evil under cover of the civil law and to end all talk of the Catholic Faith having superseded Judaism. An entire false theology of “reconciliation” with the “faith of Israel” was concocted at the “Second” Vatican Council, and one of the chief architects of this “reconciliation” was none other than the “restorer of tradition,” Father Joseph Alois Ratzinger, who said the following on December 22, 2005, in his masquerade as “Pope Benedict XVI:”

Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance - a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel.  (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005)

No event of secular history can cause the Catholic Church to breathe new life into a false religion that is hated by God. Yet it is that the conciliar revolutionaries have done so and have made it clear that those who do not accept the new “definition” of the “relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel” are outside the “mainstream” of “accepted” theology.

The events of World War II have been used by various adherents of the Talmud to demonstrate their deeply held belief that the spilling of Jewish blood is more horrible a crime than the spilling of the blood of others. Indeed, the Zionists in Israel have treated the Palestinians, who were thrown out of their own homes and had their property seized from them in 1948 and have been subjected to all manner of degrading conditions since that time, as the same sort of subhumans as the Jews and others, especially the Poles, were treated by the Nazis. As noted earlier, the exploitation of the crimes of the Nazis during World War II has resulted in an endless effort to impose "guilt" on anyone and everyone who dares to proclaim the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in public, no less hold to everything that He has revealed to us in the Sacred Deposit of Faith and has entrusted to the infallible teaching authority of His Catholic Church for Its explication and eternal safekeeping.

The professional victimologists of the synagogue have been very successful in creating and sustaining the myth that the killing of Jews is somehow “different” and more heinous than the killing of others, which is why the worldwide genocide of the innocent preborn that has killed over 1,524,610,000 babies since 1980 must be ignored and the humanity of the slaughtered babies denied. Over twenty-five times more babies than Jews worldwide have been killed under the cover of the civil law even if one accepts the completely invented, propagandized number of “six million Jews” killed by the Nazis.

Donald John Trump sustains the mythology, thus showing himself yet again for an effective tool of the synagogue. Indeed, the president, despite his justified and very commendable effort to end the unjust, immoral and unconstitutional American military involvement in Afghanistan and Syria, is quite willing to do the bidding of the murderous Israeli regime to take military action against the murderous Islamic Republic of Iran as he considers Benjamin Netanhayu to be an “ally” of the United States of America.

Lest one accuse this writer of sounding like the Mohammedan member of the United States House of Representatives Ilhnan Omar (D-Minnesota), who took her oath of office on the blasphemous Koran, copies of which have been esteemed personally by Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Argentine Apostate, let me remind readers that one of the most ironic accomplishments of the forces of hell is to make it appear that Mohammedans and Zionists are opposed to each other when the truth is that both serve as instruments of social destruction and of a fierce and unmitigated hatred of Christ the King and His true Church. One does not have rely upon the true words of a believing Mohammedan to accept the fact that the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) does indeed give hefty campaign contributions to members of both political parties it was as far back as 1981 that Patrick Joseph Buchanan called Congress to be Israeli Occupied Territory because of the influence of AIPAC. The devil wants people to defend Zionism and the Zionist State of Israel against people like Ilhnan Omar. This is but another tool of the agents of Antichrist to curry sympathy for one false religion becaues of attacks upon it by another. Don't fall into this truly dreadful and pernicious trap.

Despite the grand pronouncements of the Anti-Defamation League and ultra-Christophobic Sothern Poverty Law Center (whose professional fundraisers placed the “hate group” label on this writer and this website seven years ago—see Chopped Liver No More and Chopped Liver No More Update), it is not to be anti-Semite to denounce Judaism as a false religion or to oppose the efforts of Talmudists promote evil (usurious interest rates, contraception, abortion, perversity, explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandents, religious liberty, separation of Church and State, immodest, impure and indecent fashions and “entertainment,” etc.) nor to oppose Zionism and the schemes of the Zionist State of Israel to drain the resources of the United States of America in endless Middle Eastern wars at a time when it is enticing this country into taking military action against Iran.

Father Denis Fahey explained this in the Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation:

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.)

Yes, we must always be about the business of serving the truth, the whole truth and of umasking and refuting error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself. This includes Talmudism and Modernism, and it includes Talmudism’s useful tool to create a “safe” form of Catholicism, Americanism.

Father Fahey explained that the Jews conceive of a “natural messias,” who is none other than Antichrist, which is why they must make upon the true Church and mock the true Messias, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

The decay in the social acceptance of the divine plan for ordered life, since the thirteenth century, has had for inevitable consequence the gradual disappearance of supernatural influences and ideals from the political and economic life of nations. This is the first result. There is a second. The elimination of the supernatural from public life is making smooth the path for the coming of the natural messias. “He that is not with Me is against me.” (St. Matt. XII, 30). The world is not standing still and the once Christian nations have to choose between returning to the integral truth of the Catholic Church and falling more and more fully under the yoke of those who are systematically preparing for the advent of the natural messias. The supernatural Messias proclaimed the supremacy of the Catholic Church, His Mystical Body, which is both supernatural and supranational and respectful of the natural qualities and particular rôles of all nations. The natural messias can only have for end the subjection of all nations to the Jewish nation; for the refusal of the Jews, whose national organisation had been set up by God to prepare for Christ, to accept the supranational Church of Christ, inevitably leads to their setting up their nation as the highest embodiment of the divine order.

Calvary has then a twofold aspect. It is at one and the same time the rejection of the supernatural Messias with His programme, which is summed up in the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ, and the proclamation of a programme to be accomplished by the natural messias to come. In the Mystical Body of Christ all nations are on equal footing, each nation aiming at the temporal prosperity of its subjects so as not only not to hinder but to favour their attaining their supernatural end—union with the Blessed Trinity in supernatural life. The natural messias to whom the Jews look forward is to bring happiness to the world by the imposition of Jewish domination. It cannot be otherwise, given their messianic aspirations. Our Lord asked them to be the heralds of a supranational kingdom. Their refusal meant that they elected instead to impose their national form on the world, and they have put all their intense energy and tenacity into the struggle for the organisation of the future messianic age. Thus when any nation turns against the supernatural Messias it will be pulled in the direction of subjection to the natural messias. Satan has a wide view of things. He will be quite prepared to utilise German naturalism against our divine Lord. There is laughter in hell when human beings succumb once more to the temptation of the Garden of Eden and put themselves in the place of God, whether the new divinity be the Jewish race or any other race.

The Jewish ideal is interpreted differently by different Jews. The orthodox Jews want to return to Jerusalem, to rebuild the temple and to reinstitute their worship, while awaiting the coming of a personal Messias. The non-orthodox or Reform Jews have departed from the central hope of Judaism by rejecting belief in a personal messiah.1But they believe in the advent of a messias in the sense of a messianic age which will come through the leadership and domination of their race. “In general the Jews,” writes the Jew, Bernard Lazare, in his well-known work, L’Antisémitisme, “even the revolutionaries, have kept the Jewish spirit, and if they have given up religion and faith, they have nevertheless been formed, thanks to their ancestry and education, by the influence of Jewish nationalism. This is true in a very special way of the Jewish revolutionaries who lived in the first half of this [nineteenth] century. Heinrich Heine and Karl Marx are two typical examples.” This is true also of the Jews of high finance, the Rothschilds, the Warburgs, the Kahns, the Schiffs, etc., etc. They are one with their people in the ideal of the domination of the race and, therefore, in opposition to the supernatural life coming from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who, according to them, attempted to turn aside the Jewish nation from its destined goal.

Does that mean that all Jews are bad men? Needless to say, it does not. There are Jews in whom may be seen excellent natural qualities, and the supernatural life of grace is poured out upon us all by our Lord, even upon those who reject Him. It does mean, however, that all Jews, in proportion as they are one with the leaders and rulers of their race, will oppose the influence of the supernatural life in society and will be an active ferment of naturalism. Let us take some examples from New York where the Jews are powerful. We read in the New York Jewish paper, Freiheit, of January 10th 1937: “According to the Jewish religion, the Pope is the enemy of the Jewish people by the very fact that he is the head of the Catholic Church. The Jewish religion is opposed to Christianity and to the Catholic Church in particular.” Again we find in the New York Jewish National Day of December 14th 1935: “The public schools must be kept clear of Christmas carols and other Christmas influences. We want all this Christmas propaganda stopped.”

Thus where the Jews are powerful, they openly attack the supernatural Messias and the supernatural life of grace which comes from Him. In countries where they are only advancing to power, they content themselves with de-supernaturalising the observances and customs which have sprung from acceptance of the supernatural Messias. When the latter process has been carried on for a sufficiently long time and Catholics have grown weak, the open attack on the observance of Sunday or Christmas Day, for example, can then be launched.

As an example of Jewish action in the elimination of the supernatural significance of a Christian observance, let us take the custom of exchanging Christmas cards. Christmas is in reality the anniversary of the birth of our Redeemer, of the Second Adam who restored the supernatural life of our souls. That is the real inner reason for our joy on that day. Families and friends come together to celebrate the coming amongst us as a little human child of Him in Whom we are one as members of His Mystical Body. The body is meant to have its share of the happiness too, because the Son of Man knows that we are human beings. Now the exchange of Christmas cards is meant to remind us of these great facts in their due relation. The supernatural significance of the great feast of the Nativity should of course be always prominent. Yet what do we find? Cards which show only holly and Christmas puddings have some relation to the feast, it is true, but not to the Christ Mass. Others with merely a row of dogs or a few birds have nothing to remind the recipient of what the rejoicing is for, while Yule tide greetings seem to refer to some pagan festival and to be preparing the way for a revival of paganism.

In this process of eliminating the supernatural Messias from the celebration of the anniversary of His birth, Messrs Raphael Tuck and Sons, Ltd., the largest firm of Christmas card manufacturers, have certainly played a great part. “The Directors of this firm,” according to The Britisher of December 15th, 1937, “are registered as Gustave Tuck, Desmond Adolph Tuck and William Reginald Tuck, Bt., and the Secretary is a Mr. A. G. Jacobs. All three directors appear in the Communal Directory of the Jewish Year Book. Mr. Desmond Tuck is a warden of the Central Synagogue. Gustave Tuck is a member of the Jewish Board of Deputies Committee, a member of the Committee for the fund for German Jewry,” etc. This firm is not alone, but it has certainly been a great influence in propagating naturalism by fostering a naturalistic tone.

It will be useful for Irishmen to examine how much of Dublin’s real property has already passed into Jewish hands. Such a control must bring influence, and Jewish influence will operate against Christian social principles. Irish Catholics can see the advance of the elimination of the supernatural from public life, when a Jewish shop exhibits a card to the effect that the shop will be open all day on Christmas Day, and when Jewish professional men make appointments for Sunday morning. This disruption of the organisation of society based on the reality of the supernatural life of grace and on the vital significance of the Mass cannot proceed without disastrous effects on Catholics individually and as a body. For we know that it is only through the supernatural life which comes from our Lord that we can be good men according to the way which God requires and can correct the defects of our natural life. On the one hand, then, the increase of Jewish influence, with its inevitable naturalistic, that is, anti-supernatural, character, cannot take place without such disruption. On the other hand, we are exhorted to work for the return of society to Christ the King so that, instead of having to combat influences hostile to our supernatural life when we leave the Church after Mass, we shall on the contrary be aided by the current of life around us. Accordingly, Jewish naturalism renders conflict inevitable.

The Jews, as a nation, are objectively aiming at giving society a direction which is in complete opposition to the order God wants. It is possible that a member of the Jewish nation, who rejects our Lord, may have the supernatural life which God wishes to see in every soul, and so be good with the goodness God wants, but objectively, the direction he is seeking to give to the world is opposed to God and to that life, and therefore is not good. If a Jew who rejects our Lord is good in the way God demands, it is in spite of the movement in which he and his nation are engaged. Our Lord Jesus Christ alone is the source of the goodness God wants to see in every human being, the goodness due to participation in the inner life of the Blessed Trinity. No Jew, in virtue of what he objectively stands for, is supernaturally good as God wants him to be.

Hence there would seem to be a regrettable confusion of thought in the article on The Jews in Ireland, which appeared in The Standard (Dublin), March 3rd 1939. The article stated: “The Standard stands for the practical application of Christian principles in the public life of Ireland . . . Doubtless, there are good Jews and bad Jews, just as there are good and bad non-Jews in every country. We may praise the good and reprobate the bad . . .”

The article in The Standard was perfectly correct in insisting upon the Christian principle of exclusion of hatred of the Jews as a race. The inculcation of that spirit of charity towards the Jews, however, is not the only Christian principle that has a bearing on the problem. To work for the return of society to Christ the King, and so secure the triumph of the supernatural spirit of the Mystical Body in social life, is surely a Christian principle. The Jewish nation in an organised entity opposed to the treatment of our fellow human beings as members of Christ. We, must, therefore, combat their naturalism. Some Catholics seem to forget that the Jews who, in their terrible opposition to God, were plotting the death of our Saviour were so “pious” and “God-fearing” and “good” that they would not go into the hall of Pilate’s palace, “that they might not be defiled but that they might eat the pasch.” (St. John XVIII, 28). Pilate had to yield to their scruples and go out to them, yet alas! they were intent on the most awful crime ever committed, the crime of deicide.

Jewish naturalism, then, is disruptive of all social organisation based upon the divinity of our Lord. This disruptive process inevitably leads to a reaction on the part of the subjects of Christ the King and thus renders social conflict unavoidable. But, besides these two harmful effects, there is a third. Jewish naturalism is injurious to the Jews themselves. Opposition to the supernatural life of grace that comes from our Lord and, consequently, to ordered submission to God, our Father, is disastrous for the Jewish soul and character. Writing of the ceremonies and rites of the Old Law, such as circumcision and the worship of the synagogue, St. Thomas says: “In like manner, the ceremonies of the Old Law prefigured Christ as having yet to be born and to suffer; whereas our sacraments signify Him as already born and having suffered. Consequently just as it would be a mortal sin now for anyone, in making a profession of faith, to say that Christ is yet to be born, which the fathers of old said devoutly and truthfully; so too, it would be a mortal sin now to observe those ceremonies which the fathers of old accomplished with devotion and fidelity. Such is the teaching of St. Augustine” (Ia IIae, Q. 103, a. 4). Objectively, therefore, the Jews as a nation put themselves against the ordered return to God, which can only be through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Their opposition has not only had dire consequences in preventing and retarding the world’s acceptance of Him, but also sad effects on themselves. The results of that ceaseless battle against order are becoming increasingly visible amongst them. The persistent rejection of the one mediator, Christ Jesus, in spite of abundant light and grace, is having its inescapable consequences. As their power in the material order grows, the Jews are ceasing to believe in the God of Israel and are falling a prey to pantheism in its various forms, Marxian and other.

Does it then follow that all Jews are pantheists? It does not. In all this reasoning about the Jewish nation we are dealing with what we may speak of as moral laws in a wide sense. We cannot deduce conclusions therefrom to every individual member of the race. We must take account of the play of human liberty under the influence of the grace that comes from the Sacred Heart of Jesus to the members of the race which He loves as His own. We must affirm, however, that the Jews as a nation and therefore the vast majority of their individual members, given the solidarity of their national organisation, will everywhere show themselves hostile to the supernatural life.

His Excellency Right Rev. Antonio Garcia, Bishop of Tuy, one of the signatories of the Collective Letter of the Spanish Hierarchy of July 1st 1937, has summed up in striking language the essential features of the present struggle in the world. He had a splendid opportunity of seeing the Spanish phase of it. Mgr. Garcia writes as follows: “It is evident that the present conflict is one of the most terrible wars waged by Antichrist, that is, by Judaism, against the Catholic Church and against Christ. And at this crisis in the history of the world, Jewry uses two formidable armies: one secret, namely that of Freemasonry; the other, open and avowed, with hands dripping with blood, that of the Communists and all the other associated bodies, Anarchists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Socialists, as well as the auxiliary forces, Rotary, and Leagues of Benefaction . . . in which are preached the exclusion of Christ, of His morality and of His doctrine, or in which one hears at least that abstraction is made of such, as if Jesus Christ had not clearly declared: ‘He that is not with me is against me.’”

A writer who sees in a study of the consequences of the Jewish nation’s naturalism merely a series of fantastic statements about a supposed Jewish conspiracy has not grasped either the unity of the divine plan or the meaning of the Kingship of Christ. The Jews do work with abnormal secrecy, and in the Masonic society they certainly have a powerful secret auxiliary force working for naturalism, along with open and avowed auxiliary forces of Communists, Anarchists, etc. But it is a fact patent for all to see, that, in the world as it exists, the Jews, as an organised nation, refuse to accept Him Who is the Cornerstone of the building and the Foundation of right order, and look forward to a messianic era to be ushered in by another messias. Do they not proclaim this from the house tops? Klausner, Professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in his book, Jesus of Nazareth, writes as follows: “What is Jesus to the Jewish nation at the present day? To the Jewish nation he can be neither God nor the Son of God, in the sense conveyed by belief in the Trinity. Either conception is to the Jew not only impious and blasphemous, but incomprehensible. Neither can he, to the Jewish nation, be the Messiah: the kingdom of Heaven (the ‘Days of the Messiah’) is not yet come . . . [The ethical code of Jesus] is no ethical code for the nations and social order of today, when men are still trying to find the way to that future of the Messiah and the Prophets, and to the ‘kingdom of the Almighty’ spoken of by the Talmud, an ideal which is of this ‘world’ and which, gradually and in the course of generations, is to take shape in this world.” A critic may point out that the attack on Christianity by immoral art and by unbelief would continue without Jews in the world. It is quite true that, even if the Jews were to disappear utterly, there would still be original sin in the world and consequently forces of revolt working for naturalism, under the leadership of Satan, whose whole being is in revolt against the supernatural life of grace. What must be insisted upon, however, is that in that hypothesis, the best organised visible force, the one with the greatest cohesion and dynamic energy, would be withdrawn from the naturalist camp.

The leaders of the Jewish race have a terrible responsibility. St. Thomas insists (IIIa P.Q. 47, a. 6 ad 1), that the excusing words of our Lord: “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do” (St. Luke XXII, 34) were uttered on behalf of the common people, but not on behalf of the leaders of the Jews. Not only have they formed the ordinary people of their race to consider the idea of Our Lord being the Messias promised to their fathers as absolutely absurd, but they keep them in strict subjection. Pogroms in which the rank-and-file of the Jewish nation suffer serve the useful purpose of keeping them in absolute dependence on their leaders. 

THE OPPOSITION OF JEWISH NATURALISM TO OUR SUPERNATURAL WELL-BEING 

The fundamental nature of this opposition will be seen more clearly when we examine a point in which what I have been saying differs to some extent from the thesis of a writer whose name is a household word in Catholic circles. In his work on the Jewish question, Mr. Belloc writes as follows: “We are asked to believe that this political upheaval [the Bolshevik revolution by which the Jews got control of Russia] was part of one highly organised plot centuries old the agents of which were millions of human beings all pledged to the destruction of our society and acting in complete discipline under a few leaders superhumanly wise. The thing is nonsense on the face of it. Men have no capacity for acting in this fashion . . . moreover the motive is completely lacking. Why merely destroy, and why, if your object is merely to destroy, manifest wide differences in your aims? . . . The conception of a vast age-long plot, culminating in the contemporary Russian affair, will not hold water.”

Four points need to be touched upon. First of all, the opposition between the supernatural Messias and the natural messias is in the very nature of things. The Jews, as a nation have refused to accept the supernatural Messias, God Himself, Who came into His own world to restore our most real life, and they still look forward to another messias. They are therefore necessarily opposed to the true order of the world. As I have already said, the Jews work with abnormal secrecy and in the Masonic society they have a powerful secret auxiliary force working for naturalism, but I am here speaking of their opposition as a nation to the supernatural. It is absurd and confusing to speak of that opposition as a plot or a conspiracy, for not only is it clear to us but the Jews themselves proclaim it openly. We must always bear in mind that the world is one, and that it is, only through acceptance of our Lord Jesus Christ as the true Messias that we can live our lives as the objective order of the world demands. Mr Belloc seems to miss the force of the opposition between naturalism and the supernatural. That is one point.

Again, opposition to the order God has established in the world leads inevitably to decay in belief in God among the Jews, and to corruption in regard to the correct attitude towards their fellow human beings and in regard to the means to be employed to get other nations to accept the messianic message. It is morally inevitable that nations which resist and oppose the supernatural order of the world should suffer decay in the process. The excesses of the Bolshevik revolution thus find their explanation. We are, however, dealing with a moral law in the wide sense. God is merciful, and the Sacred Heart of Jesus loves the members of His own race with a special love. We cannot, as has been said, draw conclusions from such a law to all the individual members of the nation.

The third point concerns the differences amongst the Jews. Of course, there are differences amongst them and that, more unavoidably than amongst other nations, because of their opposition to order, but that fact cannot hide the truth of their strongly organised national solidarity. Is not the sympathy of the Jewish-controlled press throughout the world with the Muscovite, that is, Judaeo-Russian, Red government of Spain a proof of a strong unity?

The fourth point is that the Jews are not attacking Christian supernatural civilisation merely for the sake of destroying it. They are demolishing what for them are the accretions due to pagan conceptions, by which Catholicism has disfigured the messianic ideal. They want to prepare the way for the messias who, according to them, is still to come and who is to bring about peace and harmony amongst all the people of the world under their own rule. They demolish for the sake of reconstructing on another foundation. No wonder they persecuted St. Paul for his insistence on the fact that “Other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus.” (1 Cor. III, 11).

The orthodox Jews speak of the Fatherhood of God, but they refuse to accept God’s supreme manifestation of His paternity, His sending of His only-begotten Son. They consider as blasphemous the true doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and of the supernatural life by which we can enter into the family circle of the Blessed Trinity and love the Father with the Son and the Holy Ghost. In their pride they want to impose their will on God instead of humbly accepting His Will. In their pride they oppose physical descent from Abraham to the true doctrine of spiritual descent from him in unity of faith. “Know ye, therefore, that they who are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham . . . for you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus . . . And if you be Christ’s then are you the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise.” (Galatians III, 7, 26, 29). In their pride, they refuse to see in the prophecies of Isaias about the sufferings of the Messias, the narrative of the treatment that was to be meted out by them to the Messias when He came. They cannot believe that they could have made such fools of themselves as they actually did and continue to do by attempting to apply the promises of God concerning the world-wide sway of the Mystical Body of Christ to their own nation. This terrible pride is the source of the obstinacy with which they refuse to accept the Supernatural Messias. (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

How ironic it is that well-meaning "conservative" Catholics, influenced by "pro-life" evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants whose ancestors accepted Zionism by means of the notes inserted into the Scofield Bible at the behest of Zionism's founder, Theodore Herzl, have made fools of themselves by believing that there is something called Judeo-Christian values. Judaism is dead. Judaism and all of its many divisions belongs to the kingdom of satan. (For those unfamiliar with this truth, please see the section from Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton's The Catholic Church and Salvation appended below.) There are Judeo-Masonic lies, but there is no such thing as a "Judeo-Christian" value. It is Christ or chaos. Nothing in between. Nothing.

Father Fahey went on to discuss the proper meaning of the term anti-Semitism as taught by Holy Mother Church:

The Catholic Church condemns hatred and want of charity between nations just as it does between individuals. By nature we are brothers and by our supernature, the divine life of grace, we are united in a brotherhood which is infinitely nobler still. “Above the brotherhood of humanity and fatherland,” said Pope Pius XI, “there is a brotherhood which is infinitely more sacred and more precious, the brotherhood which makes us one in Christ, our Redeemer, namely, our kinship in the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ Himself.”1

The Church condemns in a more particular manner hatred of the Jews. Why is hatred of the Jewish race, as such, especially odious? Because they are the nation and race in which the lord became flesh. Our Lord is a Jew of the House of David. Catholics commonly designate this hatred by the term “anti-Semitism.”

If we take into account the condemnation of the German racial theories in the Encyclical Letter, On the Persecution of the Church in Germany, and in the Letter of the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries of April, 1938, the present National Socialist hatred of the Jewish race is to be still more severely condemned, because it is based on blasphemous and heretical presuppositions.

It must, however, be remarked with the writer of the article, Juifs et Chrétiens, in the Dictionnaire Apologétique de la Foi Chrétienne, that the Church has spoken for and against the Jews. On the one hand, the Church has spoken for the Jews to protect their persons and their worship against unjust attacks. She has always condemned acts of violence against the Jews and has respected the liberty of their consciences and allowed them freedom for their cult. On the other hand, the Church has spoken against the Jews, when they wanted to impose their yoke on the faithful and provoke apostasy. She has ways striven to protect the faithful from contamination by them. As experience in past centuries showed that if the Jews succeeded in attaining to high offices of State they would abuse their powers to the detriment of Catholics, the Church always strove to prevent Catholics from coming under their yoke. They were forbidden to proselytise and were not allowed to have Christians as slaves or servants.

On the one hand, the Church condemns race hatred in general and hatred of the Redeemer’s race in particular. On the other hand, the Church insists, as we have seen, on the duty of combating naturalism in public and private life and approves of love of native land and extols true supernatural patriotism. We have the right and the duty to defend our country and our nation against the unjust aggression of another nation. This duty is still more strongly urged upon us when it is a question of our country’s fidelity to Christ the King. We must, therefore, combat naturalism in general always and everywhere, and we must be vigilant in regard to the naturalism of the Jewish nation in particular. The tireless energy with which His own nation pursues the elimination of the influence of the supernatural life is doubly painful to our Lord’s Sacred Heart. The combat against naturalism in general and, therefore, against the organised naturalism of the Jewish nation, is urged upon us, for example, by Pope Leo XIII (Tametsi, 1900) and Pope Pius XI (Quas Primas, 1925, and Quadragesimo Anno, 1931). (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

A later section in Father Fahey's The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation explained how the use of the term anti-Semitism has been employed in the United States to control American foreign policy and public opinion long ago before Patrick Joseph Buchanan wrote about Congress being Israeli-occupied territory:

Given the naturalistic messianic ambition of the Jewish nation to impose its rule on the other nations, anti-semitism for the Jews logically means whatever is in opposition to that ambition. The situation since the Second World War is being cleverly exploited to prevent anyone from opposing Jewish aims, through fear of being dubbed an “anti-Semite.” In my book, The Mystical Body of Christ and the Reorganisation of Society, I pointed out that the disordered National Socialist action against the corroding influence of Jewish naturalism on German national life led not only to measures of repression against the Jews, with regrettable violations of their personal rights, but also to persecution of the Catholic Church. Comparatively little information concerning the anti-Catholic measures ever reached the great newspaper-reading, cinema-going public, while hardly anyone could fail to be aware of what was done to the Jews. The term “anti-semitism,” with all its war connotation of Nazi cruelty, is now having its comprehension widened to include every form of opposition to the Jewish nation’s naturalistic programme. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish naturalism is keeping Catholics blind to the consequences of accepting the term with its Jewish comprehension. According to the leaders of the Jewish nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is to be an anti-Semite.

Of all the countries in the world the United States is the country in which can best be observed this process of enlarging the comprehension of “anti-semitism” to include any and every form of opposition to what the Jewish leaders are aiming at. The United States, since its inception, has acted as if the Jewish naturalistic ambition of world-wide domination in opposition to the order of the world under Christ the King did not exist. Americans are now learning that a new anti-Christian organisation of the world is being brought about and that members of the Jewish nation are everywhere active in that work. On the one hand, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Jewish War Veterans, and the well-known Communist Front, the American Civil Liberties Union, etc., are striving to prevent instruction of the New York public school children under the released time programme. On the other hand, there are powerful members of the Jewish nation like M.M. Warburg and J. P. Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., etc., etc., behind the movement for a naturalistic (or anti-supernatural) One World Government. The chief agency in the work of crushing, by the smear of smears, “anti-Semitic,” whatever is opposed to Jewish plans, is the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith. For an accurate account of the activities of that body, the two pamphlets, The Anti-Defamation League and its use in the World Communist Offensive and Know Your Enemy, by an honourable and courageous American, Robert H. Williams, are strongly recommended.

In Know Your Enemy, Robert H. Williams classifies the work of the Anti-Defamation League under four headings. Firstly, it “builds up liberal candidates, those tolerant of Communists and Zionists, to great reputations, in preparation for political office. Among its proteges are Dewey, Warren, Harold Stassen . . . Truman, the Roosevelt sons, Chester Bowles and a motley horde of lesser New Dealers. General Eisenhower was put into his job as figurehead of Columbia University by a group of internationalists . . . the League’s Walter Winchell for months boosted the Eisenhower candidacy. Eisenhower . . . is a tool in the hands of the Zionists.” Secondly, while building up its selected candidates, “it pours a stream of money and smear propaganda into an election against a chosen enemy.” Senator Burton K. Wheeler was thus defeated in Montana in 1941. Thirdly, it maintains “a nation-wide investigative agency. By its own statement, it has 200 keymen in 1200 cities. From many sources we know that this staff of G.P.U. agents spies on the private living and businesses of scores of thousands of Americans.” Fourthly, it carries on censorship, including character-defamation to suppress criticism. “By the use of information gathered by its spies, or by distorting that information . . . or by the mere threat of a malicious campaign . . . the A.D.L. is able to keep the newspapers, magazines and book publishers and Congress from effectively opposing it . . . That is why you may never have seen the name of the Anti-Defamation League in print . . . This. mighty machine promotes Communism and Zionism, protects the Frankfurter Communist-Zionist net inside the Government, subverts our children, dominates much of moviedom.” (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

This is even truer now than it was seventy years ago. Any of us who points out the facts of history and documents the roles that Jews have had in the creation of a world at war with its Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier must be deemed an "anti-Semite" and have his work monitored and condemned by the self-appointed high priests and priestesses of the synaagogue. American politicians of the false opposites of the naturalist "left" and of the naturalist "right" are, by and large, completely under the thumb of the synagogue and its paid agents in "evangelical" or "fundamentalist" Protestant sects, to say nothing of their stooge in white who lives at the Casa Santa Marta behind the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River.

Major Williams then points out that the A.D.L’s book of smear against American anti-Communist leaders, entitled A Measure of Freedom, was prepared by a man named Arnold Forster: “Joseph P. Kamp, one of the best informed investigators in Washington, told Congress: ‘If you can get President Truman to let you look at the F.B.1. files, you will discover that Forster’s right name is Fastenberg, and that he was a member of the Communist spy ring.’8 Forster takes orders from the League’s national chairman, Meier Steinbrink, a Justice of the New York Supreme Court. Justice Steinbrink is on intimate terms with Justice Frankfurter of the U.S. Supreme Court. We have been digging down to find Communists: those below are only the party members, the gangsters. We must look up to find the really big ones, those who would not stoop to join the party, but who create its policies, Frankfurter, Steinbrink, Lehman, Morgenthau and their consorts—these are the real Communists in America. They are the Zionist power behind Communism. The Zionists aim to dominate the West; the Communists the East, both producing the same revolution, both promoting the same world government, police backed—a world dictatorship.”

Even to mention Jewish naturalistic messianism, that is, Zionism, except favourably, is anti-Semitism in the Jewish sense. In Somewhere South of Suez, Douglas Reed points out that, in the vital matter of Zionist nationalism, the freedom of the Press has become a fallacy during the two decades preceding the publication of his book in 1951. “Newspaper-writers,” he continues, “have become less and less free to express any criticism of, or report any fact unfavourable to this new ambition of the Twentieth Century. When I eventually went to America I found that this ban, for such it is in practice, prevailed even more rigidly there than in my own country . . . In the matter of Zionist nationalism, which I hold to be allied in its roots to Soviet Communism, the ban is much more severe. In my own adult lifetime as a journalist, now covering thirty years, I have seen this secret ban grow from nothing into something approaching a law of lèse-majesté at some absolute court. In daily usage, no American or British newspaper, apparently, now dares to print a line of news or comment unfavourable to the Zionist ambition; and under this thrall matters are reported favourably or non-committally, if they are reported at all, which if they occurred elsewhere would be denounced with the most piteous cries of outraged morality. The inference to me is plain: the Zionist nationalists are powerful enough to govern governments in the great countries of the remaining West . . .

“Zionist nationalism! To-day American Presidents and British Prime Ministers, and all their colleagues, watch it as anxiously as Muslim priests watch for the crescent moon on the eve of Ramadan, and bow to it as humbly as the faithful prostrating themselves in the Mosque at Mecca . . . If a third war followed the course of the second one, when military victories were used to bring about political defeats, it would be directed to bring about a further spread of the Communist empire and of the Zionist state . . . or else, the first would be overthrown merely to aggrandise the second." (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

Any dispassionate review of these prophetic words is bound to help one overcome the effects of Judeo-Masonic naturalistic and nationalistic propaganda and to thus see the dangers of our current situation. While all nations have the right of legitimate self-defense to protect their own sins, they have the obligation to adhere to the precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, which requires them to use proportionate means and to indemnify as far as is possible civilians from military attack and bombardment. It is never permissible to target civilian population centers, a prohibition that matters little to those who do not believe in Catholic truth (be they William Tecumseh Sherman or the folks who planned the Allied "obliteration bombing" of Dresden or the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or the displacement and mistreatment of Palestinian Arabs, both Christian and Mohammedan, from their homes in 1948 and thereafter by the Talmudic Jews, who have made warfare on their neighbors ever since, helping to spawn more and more attacks on their own innocent civilians as a result).

Father Fahey himself commented on the displacement of the Arabs by the Talmudic Jews when the State of Israel was formed in 1948:

“The lot of the Arab refugees,” writes Douglas Reed, “is more candidly, though pitilessly, presented in the Zionist press than in the great mass-circulation journals: ‘There is not a single Arab left in the whole of northern Palestine . . . More than one-third of all Palestine Arabs have left or lost their homes, and there is little doubt that most of them have lost their dwellings for good . . . The International Refugee organisation, which is mainly supported by the United States and Britain, announces that the Palestinian Arabs are not eligible for its assistance. The organisation has allocated $1,500,000 for the Jewish Agency’s resettlement programme.’ The point of the jest came on December 19th 1948, while the Arabs were being driven destitute from their native land. The Times then reported that: ‘The United Nations General Assembly tonight unanimously decided upon a draft convention on genocide, which is now declared a crime in International law. Genocide is defined as acts intended to destroy in whole or in part national, ethnical, racial or religious groups; and rulers, officials or individuals are made punishable by state or international penal tribunals not only for the crime but for the conspiracy, incitement or attempt to commit it . . . Hypocrisy on this scale assumes a grandeur of its own, beyond criticism. The Assembly which drafted the convention was the same which at the same moment genocided a completely inoffensive (though weak) national, ethnical, racial and religious group. Every member of the unanimous Assembly was indictable under every count . . . The word ‘genocide’ was first invented for the Nuremberg trial and applied especially to the case of the Jews. The draft convention, if that origin and the genocidal act in Palestine are borne in mind, appears to mean only that any opposition to Zionism is to be declared genocide, while anything done by Zionism is exempt.”

His Holiness, Pope Pius XII, made a moving appeal for the return of these poor refugees in his Encyclical Letter of Good Friday, 15th April, 1949, On the Holy Places in Palestine: “Although fighting has ceased, none the less we are still far from the restoration of calm and order in Palestine. Complaints are still reaching Us from those who rightly and justly grieve over the desecration of churches and images, and homes of beneficence and charity, or the destruction of the houses of cloistered communities. Very many fugitives of all ages and every state of life, driven abroad by the disastrous war, cry pitifully to Us. They live in exile, under guard and exposed to infection and all manner of dangers . . . We most earnestly implore those to whom it belongs to do justice to all who have been driven far away from their homes by the tempest of war and who long above all to live in quiet once more.”

In this Encylical Letter and in that of October 24, 1948, the Holy Father also pleaded for the internationalisation of Jerusalem. In spite of that, Israel, according to The Tablet (Brooklyn), August 9, 1952, has already moved all government offices from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem with the exception of the Foreign Office, and it is now preparing to move that also. That shows Israel’s contempt for the Holy Father’s plea and the conviction that whatever it does will not be seriously questioned by the United Nations Organisation. (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

These are facts, ladies and gentlemen.

Facts.

Facts read in the light of the Catholic Faith should help us overcome Judeo-Masonic naturalistic and nationalistic propaganda and thus to pray ever more fully for the conversion of Jews and everyone else to the true Church founded by Our Lord upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope.

No one, especially a Catholic, ought to level the baseless, sentimentally-laced charge of prejudice or bigotry against any Catholic who points out these facts. These facts are presented without malice and in a spirit of helping others to see the world for what it is and to direct our prayers and actions accordingly. Indeed, the infiltration of the spirit of naturalism has become the very foundation of the “social teaching” of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. This is indeed an aspect of the triumph of the Jewish Nation against the Messias that only a handful of traditional Catholics have been willing to explore in the past fifty to sixty years.

It is important to consider this information dispassionately as, despite his sincere intentions, President Donald John Trump and his reflexive supporters who have placed their hopes in home for a “restoration” of right principles in a world gone mad as a result of the errors upon which it is based do not recognize that refuse treat the reality of Judeo-Masonic influence upon our politics, government and social life as if it does not exist.

Here, then, a reminder of this fact from a passage in Father Fahey’s book quoted just above:

Of all the countries in the world the United States is the country in which can best be observed this process of enlarging the comprehension of “anti-semitism” to include any and every form of opposition to what the Jewish leaders are aiming at. The United States, since its inception, has acted as if the Jewish naturalistic ambition of world-wide domination in opposition to the order of the world under Christ the King did not exist. (Father Denis Fahey, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

Donald John Trump does not realize this, which is why all his efforts to swim against the deep state tide will fail to stem the “resistance” and the spread of evil and error in our land of religious indifferentism, cultural pluralism and abject hedonism. 

To reiterate what I have written so many times in the past, the warfare, including the "Russian collusion" hoax, by the Deep State and the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist "left" against President Donald Trump is only a tool of distraction to convince well-meaning people that there are "good naturalists" and "bad naturalists." Naturalism, though, remains naturalism, and the only one who wins when even believing Catholics get caught up in the "good guys versus the bad guys" trap is the adversary, who set the trap in the first place. 

Not the "New Constantine" Propaganda Again?

Although some continue to hail President Donald John Trump as a new Constantine, I want to remind readers of this site that Constantine was raised up by God, Who sent Him the Sign of the Cross in the sky with the words “With this Sign I will conquer.” No such sign has been sent to Donald John Trump, whose moving of the American Embassy in the Zionist State of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem was accompanied with the utter Talmudist propaganda that Jerusalem is the “eternal capital of the Jewish people.” It is not. Jerusalem belongs to Christ the King and His true Church, and Catholics who ignore this fact to serve as uncritical acolytes of a man who is proud that his daughter and son-in-law are Kabbalists and who has surrounded himself with Talmudists of one sort of another throughout his life as a businessman, showman, politician and president are preferring silence about the truth in order to avoid criticizing their new Constantine.

Look, folks, as I have said before, Emperor Constantine sent his holy mother, Saint Helena, to Rome to find the True Cross. The “new Constantine” sent Kabbalists Jared and Ivanka Trump Kushner to Jerusalem to proclaim that city to be the “eternal capital of the Jewish people.” Believe in the political equivalent of the tooth fairy if you want to do so. I dissent.

Constantine was raised up by God as Holy Mother Church emerged from the catacombs. Over eleven million Catholics had been put to their deaths by the Roman caesars and their minions throughout the empire from the year 67 A.D. to the time of Constantine’s Edict of Milan. These Catholics preferred death rather than giving even the appearance of any credibility or legitimacy to the symbols, beliefs or temples of worship belonging to false religions. Judaism is a false religion, and the fact that the man in the gallery of the United States House of Representatives in the United States Capitol building believed the landing of Allied paratroopers proved the existence of God to him is a telling commentary on the nature that Judaism is a religion of no faith in the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity. One who believes in the true Faith embraces the crosses, no matter how difficult or heavy, that are sent his way, seeing in them the very loving hand of God to help him to sanctify and to save his soul by making reparation for his own sins and those of others. Catholics do not need “proof” for the existence of God.

Most Americans, including, sadly, most American Catholics, do not accept the crosses in their daily lives that the all-loving, Omniscient, Omnipotent and Omnipresent God chooses to send them, which is why many seek escapes in drink, hallucinogenic drugs, food, entertainment, sports, politics and hedonistic lifestyles—and why many Americans want the “government” to indemnify them if something “goes wrong” in their lives. Even though President Donald John Trump was correct to condemn socialism in his State of the Union address, it is nevertheless true that the bloated Federal budget is the direct result of socialistic programs of social-engineering that began with the displacement of American Indians in the Trail of Tears in the early-Nineteenth Century and with the establishment of Indian Reservations in the latter part of the same century. Mention also must be made of the social engineering that took place after the forces of the government of the United States of America invaded and then set to flame the soverign states of the Confederate States of America before engaging in the unjust and immoral policies of the "reconstruction" that exploited the newly-freed slaves and punished innoncent Southerners for seeking to defend themselves against the northern invaders and opportunistic carpetbaggers. Too strong? Go tell that to Pope Pius IX, who personally wove a crown of thorns for the imprisoned Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, after the end of the War Between the States. 

Such “progressivism,” shall we say, received impetus during the administrations of President Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson prior to the institutionalization of socialized programs during the “New Deal” of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and their expansion during the “War on Poverty” (the only people whose poverty was assisted by the War on Poverty were those administered the programs that were designed to make the indigent perpetual wards of the civil state) and the “Great Society” of President Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Emperor Constantine aided Holy Mother Church as she emerged from the catacombs. The supposed “new Constantine” always heralds the "Church of Americanism" which he believes to be the very model of “democracy” that the world should follow:

When American soldiers set out beneath the dark skies over the English Channel in the early hours of D-Day, 1944, they were just young men of 18 and 19, hurtling on fragile landing craft toward the most momentous battle in the history of war.

They did not know if they would survive the hour.  They did not know if they would grow old.  But they knew that America had to prevail.  Their cause was this nation and generations yet unborn.

Why did they do it?  They did it for America.  They did it for us.

Everything that has come since — our triumph over communism, our giant leaps of science and discovery, our unrivaled progress towards equality and justice — all of it is possible thanks to the blood and tears and courage and vision of the Americans who came before.

Think of this Capitol.  Think of this very Chamber, where lawmakers before you voted to end slavery, to build the railroads and the highways, and defeat fascism, to secure civil rights, and to face down evil empires.

Here tonight, we have legislators from across this magnificent republic.  You have come from the rocky shores of Maine and the volcanic peaks of Hawaii; from the snowy woods of Wisconsin and the red deserts of Arizona; from the green farms of Kentucky and the golden beaches of California.  Together, we represent the most extraordinary nation in all of history.

What will we do with this moment?  How will we be remembered?

I ask the men and women of this Congress: Look at the opportunities before us.  Our most thrilling achievements are still ahead.  Our most exciting journeys still await.  Our biggest victories are still to come.  We have not yet begun to dream.

We must choose whether we are defined by our differences or whether we dare to transcend them.

We must choose whether we squander our great inheritance or whether we proudly declare that we are Americans.

We do the incredible.  We defy the impossible.  We conquer the unknown.

This is the time to reignite the American imagination.  This is the time to search for the tallest summit and set our sights on the brightest star.  This is the time to rekindle the bonds of love and loyalty and memory that link us together as citizens, as neighbors, as patriots.

This is our future, our fate, and our choice to make.  I am asking you to choose greatness.

No matter the trials we face, no matter the challenges to come, we must go forward together.

We must keep America first in our hearts.  We must keep freedom alive in our souls.  And we must always keep faith in America’s destiny that one nation, under God, must be the hope and the promise, and the light and the glory, among all the nations of the world. (President Donald John Trump, State of the Union Address, February 5, 2019.

Ugh, Kemosabe. Ugh.

So much mythology. So little time.

Where to start?

Well, I will start first with the mythology that the President of the United States of America is, without knowing it, a propagator of the old Pelagian heresy that has infected the ethos of the novus ordo seculorum, the United States of America, from its inceptions, namely, that Americans can do whatever it is they put their minds to doing, meaning that they do not need to have belief in, access to or cooperation with Sanctifying Grace to sustain themselves in virtue and to accomplish that which is truly good for the temporal needs of their nation in light of the common Last End of all men. Trump believes, albeit in an inchoate manner, that people can just stir up within themselves the necesssary graces to do what they put their minds to doing. In other words, Pelagianism, the founding principle undergirding Liberalism, is the belief in human self-redemption.

Secondly, it is necessary to say a word or two about the propaganda of the United States of America as a force for "good” in the world.

Although the government and the people of the United States of America have been unfailingly generous to the peoples of other nations after natural disasters, it must also be remembered that the government of the United States of America has caused disasters by means of its immoral interference in the internal affairs of other nations, especially here in the Americas ever since 1821 when the first American Ambassador to Mexico introduced Freemasonry in Our Lady’s beloved country and in The Philippines following the conclusion of the unjust and immoral Spanish-American War in 1898. Indeed, the military forces of the United States of America committed atrocities against Filipinos who sought to resist the American occupation that introduced Protestantism and Freemasonry in this Catholic land.

Moreover, it should remembered by believing Catholics that the administration of President Thomas Woodrow Wilson supported the Masonic revolutionaries persecution of our coreligionists in Mexico in the second decade of the Twentieth Century and that the administration of President John Calvin Coolidge provided American military equipment, including the best-available military combat aircraft and powerful machine guns, to the forces of Plutarco Elias Calles to use against the brave Catholics of the Cristeros between 1926 and 1929. Wilson’s slogan to justify the unjust and immoral involvement of the armed forces of the United States of America, “to make the world safe for democracy,” was employed to make Wilson’s breakup of the last remaining vestige of the Holy Roman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, into “democratic” nation-states replete with a variety of ethnic and national differences within and among them. In other words, Thomas Woodrow Wilson wanted to use the brute force of the United States of America to eliminate the secular influence of the Catholic Church, which he hated, in Europe as he blamed Holy Mother Church for the problems that led to what has been known since 1939 as World War I.

In actuality, however, Europe had become divided by rival national ambitions in the latter part of the Nineteenth and first fourteen years of the Twentieth Centuries precisely as a result of the long-term consequences of Protestantism’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the subsequent rise of Judeo-Masonry’s scores of naturalistic philosophies that permitted nationalism, which is the exaltation of one’s nation all else, especially Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His true Church, to run rampant prior to the outbreak of World War I on August 1, 1914.

Furthermore, the American “fight against fascism” employed the use of outright atrocities against civilian population centers, most notably those in Dresden, Germany, and in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. (For a brief review of the immoral nature of these atrocities, please see Catholicism, Not Machiavellianism, Is the Sole Guide to the Just Social Order), although there were many others committed upon innocent civilians in addition to the destruction of scores of Catholic churches, including the notorious bombing and destruction of Saint Benedict’s own Monte Cassino Abbey from January 17, 1944, to May 18, 1944. The pretext for the bombing and the destruction of the Abbey of Monte Cassino was false as there was only a small German police detachment on the grounds during the attacks, and the German commanders had arranged in late-1943 to remove the monks and the abbey’s treasures to the Vatican for safekeeping.

Although President Donald John Trump does not know any better, he is a believer and a propagator of the Americanist myth of “American exceptionalism.” This is not the work of a “new Constantine.” It is the old lie of Protestantism, especially of the Calvinist variety, and Judeo-Masonry that has found complete “religious expression” in the falsehood called Mormonism, itself the product of Judeo-Masonry, that has received expression from many presidents, including, quite famously, the unreconstructed Presbyterian named Ronald Wilson Reagan, who constantly invoked the “shining city set on a hill” phrase to misapply it to the “American experience” as the John Winthrop had done in the Seventeenth Century. This is what Reagan said in his farewell address on January 11, 1989 (and it is hard to believe that it is now three hundred sixty-one months since that speech was delivered):

And that's about all I have to say tonight. Except for one thing. The past few days when I've been at that window upstairs, I've thought a bit of the "shining city upon a hill." The phrase comes from John Winthrop, who wrote it to describe the America he imagined. What he imagined was important because he was an early Pilgrim, an early freedom man. He journeyed here on what today we'd call a little wooden boat; and like the other Pilgrims, he was looking for a home that would be free.

I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.

And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.

We've done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for eight years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all. (Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address, January 11, 1989, Farewell Address.)

Alas, Ronald Wilson Reagan had it wrong. Whatever accomplishments he thought were achieved during his eight years in office were undone in the years thereafter, especially during the presidencies of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, although George Herbert Walker Bush, who really had no use for many of Reagan’s policies, chipped away at a few things during his disastrous one term in office. Nothing is ever “settled” in the United States of America unless it is “settled” on the terms of the false opposite of the “left,” and this is so because everything must fall apart absent the Social Reign of Christ the King. There is a direct line from Martin Luther to Donald John Trump.

The shining city set on a hill." This blasphemous corruption of the words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ("You are the light of the world. A city seated on a mountain cannot be hid") taken from the Sermon on the Mount as recounted in the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (5: 14), to the land settled by the Catholic-hating Puritans, including the John Winthrop who was so praised by the late President Ronald Wilson Reagan?

God meant to establish the followers of the Puritans and their false, wicked, diabolical theology and approach to materialism as the "beacon" for the rest of the world?

John Winthrop as a "freedom man."

No man is a freedom man unless he yokes himself to the Cross of the Divine Redeemer as that Cross is lifted high by the Catholic Church, the one and only "shining city that is set on a hill," the one and only beacon to the world.

Some would contend that President Donald John Trump is the "best" that can be hoped for at this time and that he has been "better" that Madame Defarge, who goes by the stage name of Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton. This itself, however, is a sad commentary as what President Trump does will be undone by whichever "leftist" succeeds him on January 20, 2021, or January 20, 2025, and it is also a commentary that we are closer to the end of things as we know them than we are to the beginnings of Christendom following Emperor Constantine's Edict of Milan one thousand seven hundred six years ago. Christedom was founded and expanded because of the evangelization of pagan and barbarian peoples who became united by a common belief in the true Faith, which alone is the foundation for order within the souls of men and hence in the world. A new Christendom cannot be built on a welter of errors and as those who pretend to be the officials of the Catholic Church celebrate the inherent virtues and supposedly sanctifying and peace-giving powers of false religions and even of paganism and atheism themselves. 

The "new Constantine" propaganda ignores the reality of a world that is collapsing before our very eyes because of the devil's attack, starting near the end of the Thirteenth Century, upon the unity, order and sanctity that Catholicism and Catholicism alone produced in Europe. The only thing that can be produced by naturalism and its related errors is naturalism and the multiplication of more and more errors.

The Direct, Intentional Killing of Every Innocent Human Being is Immoral No Matter the Victim's Age

Even the president's passionate condemnation of the law passed by the New York State Legislature on January 23, 2019, the Feast of Saint Raymond of Pennafort and the Commemoration of Saint Emerentiana, ignored the fact that the direct, intentional killing of every innocent human being is immoral no matter the victim's age.  the fact that this has become the great “pro-life” cause is itself tragic. I mean, is the best that can be done at this time to oppose the killing of babies who have managed to avoid being killed as they were being born?

Once again, I am not blaming the president for this state of things. Not at all. However, the Congress of the United States of America as presently constituted will not pass legislation to ban the surgical execution of children except to "save the life of the mother" (for a refutation of this canard, please see  Prepare for the Coming Persecution ) and even state legislatures that pass such a ban will have to deal with the man I have been telling you will never vote to reverse Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton (which did indeed permit the killing of children up to and including the day of birth if the "health of the mother "necessitated" the execution of her child), namely, Opus Dei's own John Glover Roberts. Let me remind you of what I wrote in "Confirmations of a Different Sort" seven months ago now after the announcement by Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Anthony McLeod Kennedy was to retire at the end of July, 2018:

Third, the president’s nominee, if confirmed, will not place the decisions in the cases of Roe v. Wade or Doe v. Bolton in jeopardy as Chief Justice John Glover Roberts will once again twist himself into a pretzel to preserve decisions that have no standing before the bar of Divine Justice.

How can I say this?

All right.

Here is a bit of proof:

WASHINGTON — At Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s confirmation hearings 14 years ago, the first dozen questions were about whether he would respect the Supreme Court’s abortion precedents. He was still answering those questions Thursday night.

In a surprise move, the chief justice joined the Supreme Court’s liberal wing in a 5-to-4 decision blocking a Louisiana law that could have severely restricted abortion in the state. Although he offered no reason for his vote, there is little doubt that he wanted to avoid sending the message that the court was ready to discard a 2016 decision, a precedent, in which it struck down a similar Texas law.

But the court’s order was just three sentences long, and the stay it imposed was temporary. The case is likely to reach the court on its merits next term. And when that happens, it is hardly certain that Chief Justice Roberts will vote to strike down the Louisiana law.

The seeming inconsistency is the result of competing impulses. Chief Justice Roberts is a product of the conservative legal movement, and his general approach is to lean right. But he is also an institutionalist and a guardian of his court’s legitimacy, meaning he wants to make modest and deliberate moves.

In practice, that may mean that abortion rights — like gay rights, affirmative action and protections for criminal defendants — are not at immediate risk. But they are in more danger now that the chief justice has assumed the pivotal role on the court that used to belong to the somewhat more liberal Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who retired last year.

Thursday’s order, then, was hardly a guarantee that Chief Justice Roberts will vote to protect the constitutional right to abortion established in Roe v. Wade in 1973, Michael C. Dorf, a law professor at Cornell, wrote in a blog post.

“But it does suggest that he is at least in a go-slow mode,” Professor Dorf wrote.

“So no, the abortion right is not safe,” he added. “But it’s not in quite as much immediate danger as one might have thought. And that’s not nothing.”

At his 2005 confirmation hearings, Chief Justice Roberts told Senator Arlen Specter that the Supreme Court should be wary of overturning precedents, in part because doing so threatens the court’s legitimacy.

“It is a jolt to the legal system when you overrule a precedent,” he said. “Precedent plays an important role in promoting stability and evenhandedness.”

Mr. Specter, at the time a moderate Republican protective of abortion rights, was pleased with the answer. “A jolt to the legal system, a movement against stability — one of the Roberts doctrines,” he said.

That Roberts doctrine was on display Thursday. The precedent at risk was Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which in 2016 struck down a Texas abortion law that required doctors providing abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The majority said the requirement served no medical purpose and imposed an undue burden on women’s constitutional right to abortion.

The vote was 5 to 3, with Chief Justice Roberts one of the dissenters. He might have been expected to take a similar stance in Thursday’s case. Instead, at least for now, he declined to give the legal system a jolt.

At the confirmation hearing, Mr. Specter also tried to get Chief Justice Roberts to say that Roe was a “super-duper precedent,” because the Supreme Court had reaffirmed its core holding in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Chief Justice Roberts declined to adopt Mr. Specter’s terminology, but he did not quarrel with his larger point. Indeed, he said the legal doctrine of stare decisis, which is Latin for “to stand by things decided,” counseled caution in light of the Casey decision’s extended discussion of the importance of adhering to precedent.

“The Casey decision itself, which applied the principles of stare decisis to Roe v. Wade, is itself a precedent of the court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis,” Chief Justice Roberts said. “That is itself a precedent. It’s a precedent on whether or not to revisit the Roe v. Wade precedent. And under principles of stare decisis, that would be where any judge considering the issue in this area would begin.”

At the same time, he said respect for precedent must sometimes give way to other considerations, including whether “a particular precedent is workable or not” as a practical matter and “whether a precedent has been eroded by subsequent developments” in the law.

Chief Justice Roberts has occasionally voted to overrule precedents, notably in cases on campaign finance and public unions. In 2007, he joined the majority in a 5-to-4 decision sustaining the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Act. Just seven years earlier, the court had struck downa similar Nebraska law by the same vote.

What had changed in the interim was that Justice Sandra Day O’Connor had retired and been succeeded by the more conservative Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.

“The key to the case was not in the difference in wording between the federal law and the Nebraska act,” Erwin Chemerinsky, now dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote at the time. “It was Justice Alito having replaced Justice O’Connor.”

Abortion rights proponents worry that the replacement of Justice Kennedy with the more conservative Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh may cause a similar shift.

Justice Kennedy was, after all, in the majority in the 2016 Texas case. Since then, two Trump appointees — Justices Kavanaugh and Neil M. Gorsuch — have joined the court.

On Thursday, Justice Kavanaugh appeared to acknowledge the binding nature of the Texas decision, though he chose his words carefully.

“All parties, including the state of Louisiana, agree that Whole Woman’s Health is the governing precedent for purposes of this stay application,” he wrote in a dissent. “I therefore will analyze the stay application under that precedent.”

Justice Kavanaugh said the majority had moved too fast in blocking the law and should have called for more information about its practical effect.

His approach was a variation on Chief Justice Roberts’s incrementalism and reluctance to overrule precedents outright. But abortion rights proponents remain wary of both justices, fearing that they will take a winding road toward a destination at which many more women, and especially poor ones, will find it hard to obtain abortions.

Chief Justice Roberts’s fullest judicial discussion of the power of precedent came in a concurring opinion in 2010 in the Citizens United decision, which overruled two campaign finance precedents. Departures from precedent, he wrote, require very good reasons.

But he added, quoting from earlier decisions, that the Supreme Court remained free to correct its worst errors.

“Stare decisis is neither an ‘inexorable command’ nor ‘a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision,’ especially in constitutional cases,” he wrote. “If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants.”

That passage suggests that there will be room, at the right time, for the chief justice to reconsider Roe, and to elaborate on what the Roberts doctrine means for that contested precedent.(Chief Justice Votes With Liberal Bloc.)

Yes, Associate Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh got it right this time, unlike what happened a few months ago when he joined with Roberts and Associate Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to vote not take up a case involving laws in the States of Kansas and Louisiana to ban Planned Barrenthood frin using Medicaid funds to kill babies. That's good. Howevever, there is no guarantee that the ban who twice saved the unconstitutional and immoral ObamaDeathCare will not continue to play his role as the "uber-institutionalist" when he comes to "preserving" a legal "precedent" that has no standing with the true God of Divine Revelation and is also contrary to the binding precepts of the Natural Law and, I would contend, to the very language of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. 

Thus, you see, no matter how rhetorically committed President Trump is to ending late-term abortions, the fact remains that there are no moral distinction between killing a preborn baby when he is several weeks old in his mother’s womb or killing that baby after he is born. While civil law can make such distinctions and impose different types of penalties based upon a consideration of time and circumstance, the direct, intentional killing of an innocent human being is always the same crime morally. What civil law cannot do is permit such killing at any time, which is why those who contend that decisions about baby-killing must be made by state legislatures or by means of a popular referendum in the states continue to spread the egregious error that contingent beings have the the authority to "decide" matters that exist in the nature of things and are beyond the ability of human beings to change in any way.

This having been noted, however, the individuals who are principally responsible for letting the daily killing of the preborn get so out of control that some in public life have been emboldened to admit that, yes, it is the de facto practice in many hospitals around the country to let babies die after birth based upon utilitarian considerations can be laid at the feet of most of the conciliar “bishops” here in the United States of America. They—and their predecessors—are the ones who have been afraid to lose their tax-exempt status and/or to be thought as helping “mean” men such as the president who are said to have “anti-life policies on immigration, “climate change” and “economic justice.” Americanism has played its own role in helping to produce and to maintain the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means.

It is a very sad commentary that Donald John Trump has been more vocal about the killing of children in the later stages than have the conciliar "bishops." Then again, it is essential to remember that the men in chancery offices are not "bishops" as they are not Catholics and because the conciliar rite of episcopal consecration is invalid. Silence from them makes perfect sense.

Americanism: A Building Block of the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism's "Social Teaching"

Pope Leo XIII, concerned that Catholics in the United States of America were being coopted by the prevailing ethos of religious indifferentism, cultural pluralism, egalitarianism and majoritarianism to view the Catholic Faith through the lens of Americanism rather than to view the world through the supernatural eyes of the true Faith. Prophetically, he saw that the days were coming before too long when Catholics would desire from Holy Mother Church what they saw in their governing structures and social circumstances: unbridled freedom of conscience and action, democracy and equality between the priesthood of the ordained minister and the common priesthood of the faithful that each Catholic has by virtue of his baptism.

Writing in an Apostolical Letter, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899, to James Cardinal Gibbons, an Americanist who was the Archbishop of Baltimore, Maryland, from 1877 to 1921, Pope Leo XIII explained his concerns quite explicitly:

But, beloved son, in this present matter of which we are speaking, there is even a greater danger and a more manifest opposition to Catholic doctrine and discipline in that opinion of the lovers of novelty, according to which they hold such liberty should be allowed in the Church, that her supervision and watchfulness being in some sense lessened, allowance be granted the faithful, each one to follow out more freely the leading of his own mind and the trend of his own proper activity. They are of opinion that such liberty has its counterpart in the newly given civil freedom which is now the right and the foundation of almost every secular state.

In the apostolic letters concerning the constitution of states, addressed by us to the bishops of the whole Church, we discussed this point at length; and there set forth the difference existing between the Church, which is a divine society, and all other social human organizations which depend simply on free will and choice of men.

It is well, then, to particularly direct attention to the opinion which serves as the argument in behalf of this greater liberty sought for and recommended to Catholics.

It is alleged that now the Vatican decree concerning the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff having been proclaimed that nothing further on that score can give any solicitude, and accordingly, since that has been safeguarded and put beyond question a wider and freer field both for thought and action lies open to each one. But such reasoning is evidently faulty, since, if we are to come to any conclusion from the infallible teaching authority of the Church, it should rather be that no one should wish to depart from it, and moreover that the minds of all being leavened and directed thereby, greater security from private error would be enjoyed by all. And further, those who avail themselves of such a way of reasoning seem to depart seriously from the over-ruling wisdom of the Most High-which wisdom, since it was pleased to set forth by most solemn decision the authority and supreme teaching rights of this Apostolic See-willed that decision precisely in order to safeguard the minds of the Church's children from the dangers of these present times.

These dangers, viz., the confounding of license with liberty, the passion for discussing and pouring contempt upon any possible subject, the assumed right to hold whatever opinions one pleases upon any subject and to set them forth in print to the world, have so wrapped minds in darkness that there is now a greater need of the Church's teaching office than ever before, lest people become unmindful both of conscience and of duty.

We, indeed, have no thought of rejecting everything that modern industry and study has produced; so far from it that we welcome to the patrimony of truth and to an ever-widening scope of public well-being whatsoever helps toward the progress of learning and virtue. Yet all this, to be of any solid benefit, nay, to have a real existence and growth, can only be on the condition of recognizing the wisdom and authority of the Church. (Pope Leo XIII,Testem Benvolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899.)

Pope Leo XIII "took off the gloves" in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, having praised what he could of various elements of the American founding, including the natural virtues of George Washington, in Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 1895, before making it clear in that encyclical letter that the American bishops were not doing what they could to Catholicize the nation, especially as pertains to making his own encyclical letters on Church-State relatoins known to the Catholics of the United States of America. Pope Leo wanted to make it abundantly clear in Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae that some of the American bishops did indeed want to view the Deposit of Faith through the lens of the American Constitution as the prototype of a "future church" modeled along the lines of "democracy" and "collegiality" and "egalitarianism" and "ecumenism." This telling passage from Pope Leo's Apostolical Letter to the longtime Americanist Archbishop of Baltimore, James Cardinal Gibbons, is a prophetic warning about the counterfeit church of conciliarism that would owe much of its origins to the heresy of Americanism:

For it would give rise to the suspicion that there are among you some who conceive of and desire the Church in America to be different from what it is in the rest of the world. (Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899.)

Behold the fact that the Church desired by the Americanists in the Nineteenth Century has arisen, the counterfeit church of conciliarism, that embraces the errors of Modernity while propagating them anew with a Modernist spin. As it is false of its very nature, conciliarism reflects the competing camps of the false opposites of “liberalism” and “conservativism” that exist in the world, and is thus doomed as everything else based on falsehoods, including the modern civil state that is designed the make the world safe for every “religion” except Catholicism and for everything that eschews the Natural Law in favor of moral subjectivism.

Quite specifically, you see, a nation that is not founded on right principles must degenerate into the barbarism of our present era, having no immutable teaching authority to guide it, choosing to be "guided" by the demigods of national founding fathers and/or by the shifting winds of majoritarian sentiment at any particular point in time. Contradiction and instability are bound to result, as we can see with great clarity today. It is very much beside the point to argue that the "founders" would have opposed this or that social evil. They premised the entire fabric of national life under the Constitution upon the false belief that men could sort out their differences by means of a cumbersome process of negotiation and debate in the national legislative process, believing that there was no single belief that could unite men and guide them in the pursuit of the common good as the supreme and eternal good each man was kept in mind. There is no way, therefore, for naturalists to use a naturalist Constitution to defend against various evils. Evil must win when man does not subordinate himself to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church and when men do not have belief in, access to or cooperation with Sanctifying Grace

Here is a summary of the major principles that explain why naturalism is incapable of providing the framework for social order and must yield to the forces of barbarism over the course of time:

1) There are limits that exist in the nature of things beyond which men have no authority or right to transgress, whether acting individually or collectively in the institutions of civil governance.

2) There are limits that have been revealed positively by God Himself in his Divine Revelation, that bind all men in all circumstances at all times, binding even the institutions of civil governance.

3) A divinely-instituted hierarchy exists in man’s most basic natural unit of association: the family. The father is the head of the family and governs his wife and children in accord with the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the natural law. Children do not have the authority to disobey the legitimate commands of their parents. Parents do not have the authority to issue illegitimate and/or unjust commands.

4) Our Lord Himself became Incarnate in Our Lady’s virginal and immaculate womb, subjecting Himself to the authority of His creatures, obeying his foster-father, Saint Joseph, as the head of the Holy Family, thus teaching us that all men everywhere must recognize an ultimate authority over them in their social relations, starting with the family.

5) Our Lord instituted the Catholic Church, founding it on the Rock of Peter, the Pope, to be the means by which His Deposit of Faith is safeguarded and transmitted until the end of time. The Church is the mater, mother, and magister, teacher, of all men in all nations at all times, whether or not men and nations recognize this to be the case.

6) The Pope and the bishops of the Church have the solemn obligation to proclaim nothing other than the fullness of the truths of the Faith for the good of the sanctification and salvation of men unto eternity and thus for whatever measure of common good in the temporal real, which the Church desires earnestly to promote, can be achieved in a world full of fallen men.

7) It is not possible for men to live virtuously as citizens of any country unless they first strive for sanctity as citizens of Heaven. That is, it is not possible for there to be order in any nation if men do not have belief in access to and cooperation with sanctifying grace, which equips them to accept the truths contained in the Deposit of Faith and to obey God’s commands with diligence in every aspect of their lives without exception.

8) The rulers of Christendom came to understand, although never perfectly and never without conflicts and inconsistencies, that the limits of the Divine positive law and the natural law obligated them to exercise the powers of civil governance with a view towards promoting man’s temporal good in this life so as to foster in him his return to God in the next life. In other words, rulers such as Saint Louis IX, King of France, knew that they would be judged by Our Lord at the moment of his Particular Judgment on the basis of how well they had fostered those conditions in their countries that made it more possible for their subjects to get to Heaven.

9) The rulers of Christendom accepted the truth that the Church had the right, which she used principally through her Indirect Power over civil rulers by proclaiming the truths of the Holy Faith, to interpose herself in the event that a civil ruler proposed to do something or had indeed done something that violated grievously the administration of justice and thus posed a grave threat to the good of souls.

10) The Social Kingship of Jesus Christ may be defined as the right of the Catholic Church to see to it that the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law are the basis of the actions of civil governance in all that pertains to the good of souls and that those who exercise civil power keep in mind man’s last end, the salvation of his immortal soul as a member of the Catholic Church. Civil leaders must, therefore, recognize the Catholic Church as the true Church founded by God Himself and having the right to reprimand and place interdicts upon those who issue edicts and ordinances contrary to God’s laws.

This is but a brief distillation of the points contained in the brilliant social encyclical letters of Popes Leo XIII, St. Pius X, and Pius XI, in particular, although Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX also contributed to their reiteration and explication. I have spent much time in the past twenty-five years or so illustrating these points with quotations from these encyclical letters, which contain immutably binding teachings that no Catholic may dissent from legitimately (as Pope Pius XI noted in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio in 1922).

The Modern State, including the United States of America, is founded on a specific and categorical rejection of each of these points. Consider the following:

1) Martin Luther himself said that a prince may be a Christian but that his religion should not influence how he governs, giving rise to the contemporary notion of “separation of Church and state,” condemned repeatedly by Popes in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries.

2) Martin Luther planted the seeds of contemporary deconstructionism, which reduces all written documents to the illogical and frequently mutually contradictory private judgments of individual readers, by rejecting the Catholic Church as the repository and explicator of the Deposit of Faith, making the “private judgment” of individuals with regard to the Bible supreme. If mutually contradictory and inconsistent interpretations of the Bible can stand without correction from a supreme authority instituted by God, then it is an easy thing for all written documents, including a Constitution that makes no reference at all to the God-Man or His Holy Church, to become the plaything of whoever happens to have power over its interpretation

3) The sons of the so-called Enlightenment, influenced by the multifaceted and inter-related consequences of the errors of the Renaissance and the Protestant Revolt, brought forth secular nations that contended the source of governing authority was the people. Ultimately, all references to “God” were in accord with the Freemasonic notion of a “supreme intelligence” without any recognition of the absolute necessity of belief in and acceptance of the Incarnation and of the Deposit of Faith as it has been given to Holy Mother Church for personal happiness and hence al social order.

4) The Founding Fathers of the United States of America did not believe that it was necessary to refer all things in civil life to Christ the King as He had revealed Himself through His true Church, believing that men would be able to pursue “civic virtue” by the use of their own devices and thus maintain social order in the midst of cultural and religious pluralism. This leads, as Pope Leo XIII noted of religious indifferentism, to the triumph of the lowest common denominator, that is, atheism.  

5) As the Constitution of the United States of America admits of no authority higher than its own words, it, like the words of Holy Writ are for a Protestant or to a Modernist, is utterly defenseless when the plain meanings of its words are distorted and used to advance ends that its framers would have never thought imaginable, no less approved in fact. The likes of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton have no regard for the words of the Constitution or for the just laws passed by Congress, and Donald John Trump is plainly ignorant of some of the fact that there are seven articles in the Constitution and twenty-seven amendments to it since its ratification in 1788. We are governed by men who are contemptuous or law or wholly ignorant of it. Quite a state of affairs.

6) This is but the secular version of Antinomianism: the belief advanced by those who took the logic of Luther’s argument of being “saved by faith alone” to its inexorable conclusion that one could live a wanton life of sin and still be saved. Luther himself did not see where the logic of his rejection of Catholic doctrine would lead and fought against the Antinomians. In like manner, you see, the Constitutionalists and Federalists of today do not see that what is happening today in Federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States, is the inexorable result of a Constitution that rejects Christ the King and the Catholic Church. These Constitutionalists and Federalists will fight time and time again like Sisyphus pushing the bolder up a hill. They will always lose because they cannot admit that the thing they admire, the Constitution, is the proximate problem that has resulted in all of the evils they are trying to fight.

A nation founded on false premises, no matter the "good intentions" of those whose intellects were misinformed by several centuries of naturalist lies and Protestant theological heresies and errors, is bound to degenerate more and more over time into a land of materialism and hedonism and relativism and positivism and utilitarianism and naturalism and paganism and atheism and environmentalism and feminism and barbarism. Many evils, including the daily carnage against the preborn, both by surgical and chemical means, continue to be committed in this country. American "popular culture" destroys souls and bodies both here and abroad. Full vent is given each day to a panoply of false ideas that are from Hell and confuse even believing Catholics no end as they try to find some "naturalist" hero or idea by which to win the "culture wars," oblivious to the fact that it is only Catholicism that can do so.

The United States of America will never know true liberty until it submits itself to the sweet yoke of Social Reign of Christ the King and raises the holy standard that Emperor Constantine saw in the sky: the Holy Cross of Our Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Pope Saint Pius X explained that the true shining city set on a hill is the Catholic City. None other:

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

The city we must build up every day within our own souls is the Catholic City. We must conform everything in our own lives to the immutable truth of the Holy Faith as we seek to cooperate with the graces won for us by Christ the King by virtue of the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. The Catholic City can only be built up in the world after we have sought to build it up within the fortress of our immortal souls, which have been redeemed at so great a cost.

To this end, of course, we must be totally consecrated to Our Lord through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.

The farces of Modernity in the world and of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism are converging to impose upon us an era of persecution and hardship. These forces are driven by principalities and powers, and they will not be defeated in an election. They can be defeated only by the use of supernatural means. Nations whose citizens fail to understand this truth are destined to be governed by tyrants, no matter how “soft” and “tolerant they may seem.

A system of civil governance that fosters conditions that are inimical to man's last end is bound to degenerate over the course of time into a such a state of lawlessness that a "state religion" will be imposed by the brute force of the the civil state, namely, that of statism itself, the worship of the state and of its leaders as omniscient and omnipotent. The antidote to this is not found in any naturalistic philosophy, such as libertarianism or conservatism, but in Catholicism alone. There is no way--as in no way--to retard the evils caused by the separation of Church and State wrought by Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and their actual, concrete expressions in the American and French Revolutions except by planting the seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the Social Reign of Christ the King and Our Lady, she who is our Immaculate Queen,

This is the work to which each of us is called. We are called to look beyond the lies of office-seekers steeped in naturalism and are clueless about First and Last Things in order to build up Christendom in our homes, starting with their being Enthroned to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, pulsating with the rhythm provided by the liturgical life of the Church, especially (where this is possible) daily Mass in the Catholic catacombs where no concessions are made to conciliarism or its false shepherds who are opposed to the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King, and animated by fervent family prayer, especially by means of the daily family Rosary and frequent visits to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament. We must be about the business of penance and of making reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world.

We are not called to be worldlings. We are not called to be grubby Calvinist materialists. We are not called to be successful careerists willing to compromise the Faith at any given moment in order to "get ahead." We are called to be faithful to Christ the King and to ever reliant upon Mary our Immaculate Queen, ever desirous of scaling the heights of sanctity, which is the sole foundation of order in the soul and hence of order within society itself.

Pope Pius XI, writing in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925, exhorted us to be soldiers in army of Christ the King:

Thus the empire of our Redeemer embraces all men. To use the words of Our immortal predecessor, Pope Leo XIII: "His empire includes not only Catholic nations, not only baptized persons who, though of right belonging to the Church, have been led astray by error, or have been cut off from her by schism, but also all those who are outside the Christian faith; so that truly the whole of mankind is subject to the power of Jesus Christ." Nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ. In him is the salvation of the individual, in him is the salvation of society. "Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given to men whereby we must be saved." He is the author of happiness and true prosperity for every man and for every nation. "For a nation is happy when its citizens are happy. What else is a nation but a number of men living in concord?" If, therefore, the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ. What We said at the beginning of Our Pontificate concerning the decline of public authority, and the lack of respect for the same, is equally true at the present day. "With God and Jesus Christ," we said, "excluded from political life, with authority derived not from God but from man, the very basis of that authority has been taken away, because the chief reason of the distinction between ruler and subject has been eliminated. The result is that human society is tottering to its fall, because it has no longer a secure and solid foundation."

When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony. Our Lord's regal office invests the human authority of princes and rulers with a religious significance; it ennobles the citizen's duty of obedience. It is for this reason that St. Paul, while bidding wives revere Christ in their husbands, and slaves respect Christ in their masters, warns them to give obedience to them not as men, but as the vicegerents of Christ; for it is not meet that men redeemed by Christ should serve their fellow-men. "You are bought with a price; be not made the bond-slaves of men." If princes and magistrates duly elected are filled with the persuasion that they rule, not by their own right, but by the mandate and in the place of the Divine King, they will exercise their authority piously and wisely, and they will make laws and administer them, having in view the common good and also the human dignity of their subjects. The result will be a stable peace and tranquillity, for there will be no longer any cause of discontent. Men will see in their king or in their rulers men like themselves, perhaps unworthy or open to criticism, but they will not on that account refuse obedience if they see reflected in them the authority of Christ God and Man. Peace and harmony, too, will result; for with the spread and the universal extent of the kingdom of Christ men will become more and more conscious of the link that binds them together, and thus many conflicts will be either prevented entirely or at least their bitterness will be diminished.

If the kingdom of Christ, then, receives, as it should, all nations under its way, there seems no reason why we should despair of seeing that peace which the King of Peace came to bring on earth -- he who came to reconcile all things, who came not to be ministered unto but to minister, who, though Lord of all, gave himself to us as a model of humility, and with his principal law united the precept of charity; who said also: "My yoke is sweet and my burden light." Oh, what happiness would be Ours if all men, individuals, families, and nations, would but let themselves be governed by Christ! "Then at length," to use the words addressed by our predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, twenty-five years ago to the bishops of the Universal Church, "then at length will many evils be cured; then will the law regain its former authority; peace with all its blessings be restored. Men will sheathe their swords and lay down their arms when all freely acknowledge and obey the authority of Christ, and every tongue confesses that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father". . . .

If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society. We refer to the plague of anti-clericalism, its errors and impious activities. This evil spirit, as you are well aware, Venerable Brethren, has not come into being in one day; it has long lurked beneath the surface. The empire of Christ over all nations was rejected. The right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation, that right was denied. Then gradually the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them. It was then put under the power of the state and tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers. Some men went even further, and wished to set up in the place of God's religion a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart. There were even some nations who thought they could dispense with God, and that their religion should consist in impiety and the neglect of God. The rebellion of individuals and states against the authority of Christ has produced deplorable consequences. We lamented these in the Encyclical Ubi arcano; we lament them today: the seeds of discord sown far and wide; those bitter enmities and rivalries between nations, which still hinder so much the cause of peace; that insatiable greed which is so often hidden under a pretense of public spirit and patriotism, and gives rise to so many private quarrels; a blind and immoderate selfishness, making men seek nothing but their own comfort and advantage, and measure everything by these; no peace in the home, because men have forgotten or neglect their duty; the unity and stability of the family undermined; society in a word, shaken to its foundations and on the way to ruin. We firmly hope, however, that the feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.

Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)

We should consider our privilege to run the risk of whatever calumnies may come our way for being steadfast in behalf of the cause of Christ the King and His Most Blessed Mother, our Immaculate Queen, offering to the Most Sacred Heart of Our King all of our sufferings and humiliations for reminding everyone, including the apostates in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who believe are the latter-day apostles of the heresy of Americanism, that He must rule over men and nations, making this offering to Him through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother.

Catholics are called to love their country. However, true love of one's country does not mean overlooking the false premises upon which its governing system is founded as it is for love of Christ the King and a true love of one's country that we pray and work for the day when the State of the American Union will be Catholic from top to bottom without exception.

The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

It is time to plant some seeds for this victory now as the hour is very late indeed.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!  

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 Beloved, 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 Balathasar, pray for us.

Appendix A

From Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton's The Catholic Church and Salvation

The Concept of Salvation

The concept of eternal salvation runs throughout the entire New Testament. It is one of the basic notions in the teaching which Our Lord preached as the divine message He had received from His Father. He described Himself as coming to save what was lost. “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.” [Matt. 18: 11; see also Luke, 19, 19: 10.] Christ is Our Saviour. His work is preeminently that of our salvation.

Now, the term “to save,” employed in sacred theology and in the English translations of the New Testament as the equivalent of the Latin “salvare” designates the process by which a person is removed from a condition in which he is destined for ruin or death and is transferred to a condition in which he may live and prosper. Basically, that is the meaning expressed by the expression “saving someone,” employed in ordinary terminology. Thus, years ago, when we frequently read in the newspapers about the feats of the then young first officer of the steamship America (later Commodore Harry Manning) in saving the lives of the crews of several fishing boats that had been swamped in the Atlantic storms, we all understood that this man and the mariners under his command had taken the victims off the wrecked boats to which they were clinging and had brought them to the safety of the ocean liner to which he was assigned.

The men were saved, in the sense that they were transferred from positions in which they would inevitably have drowned very soon into the security of the liner, and eventually to the shores of their own countries. Med who were transferred at sea from on seaworthy vessel to another could never have been described as “saved”.

The salvation of men, described in divine public revelation, is a salvation in the strict or proper sense of the term. It is a process by which men are removed from a condition or status which would involve them in everlasting death if they remained within it, to a condition in which they may enjoy eternal life and happiness.

It is highly important to understand that this process is quite complex. The terminus a quo, the undesirable condition, from which men are removed in the process of salvation is basically sin, the status of aversion from almighty God. A man is said to be saved, absolutely and simply, when he is taken out of the condition of original or mortal sin and brought into the status of the eternal and supernatural life of grace. Ultimately that process in achieved and perfected when the person saved comes to possess the life of grace eternally and inamissibly, in the everlasting glory of the Beatific Vision. There is genuine salvation, however, when the man who has hitherto been in the state of original or mortal sin is brought into the life of sanctifying grace, even in this world, when that life of grace can be lost through the man's own fault.

There is, however, a definitely social aspect to the process of salvation. In the merciful designs of God's providence, the man who is transferred from the state of original or mortal sin into the state of grace is brought in some way “within” a social unit, the supernatural kingdom of the living God. In heaven that community is the Church triumphant, the company of the elect enjoying the Beatific Vision. On earth it is the Church militant. Under the conditions of the new or the Christian dispensation, that community is the organized or visible religious society which is the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ on earth.

We must not lose sight of the fact that people in the condition of aversion from God, in the state of original or mortal sin, belong in some way to a kingdom or an ecclesia under the leadership of Satan, the moving spirit among the spiritual enemies of God. Hence the process of salvation involves necessarily the transfer of an individual from one social unit or community to another, from the kingdom Satan to the true and supernatural kingdom of the living God.

The opening paragraph of Pope Leo XIII's encyclical against Freemasonry, the letter Humanum genus, brings out the relations between these two communities with unmatched clarity and accuracy.

The race of man, after its miserable fall from God, the Creator and the Giver of heavenly gifts, “through the envy of the devil,” separated into two diverse parts, of which the one steadfastly contents for truth and virtue, the other for those things which are contrary to virtue and to truth. The one is the kingdom of God on earth, the true Church of Jesus Christ; and those who desire from their heart to be united with it so as to gain salvation must of necessity serve God and His only-begotten son with their whole mind and with an entire will. The other is the kingdom of Satan, in whose possession and control are all whosoever follow the fatal example of their leader and of our first parents, those who refuse to obey the divine and eternal law, and who have many aims of their own in contempt of God, and many aims also against God.

This twofold kingdom St. Augustine keenly discerned and described after the manner of two cities, contrary in their laws because striving for contrary objects; and with subtle brevity he expressed the efficient cause of each in these words: “Two loves formed two cities: the love of self, reaching even to contempt of God, an earthly city; and the love of God, reaching even to contempt of self, a heavenly one.” At every period of time each has been in conflict with the other, with a variety and multiplicity of weapons and of warfare, although not always with equal ardor and assault. [This passage is found in Father Wynne's edition of The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1903), p. 83]

This intrinsically social aspect of salvation is brought out in the account, in the Acts of the Apostles, of the end of St. Peter's sermon on the first Christian Pentecost and of the results of that sermon.

Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their hearts and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call. And with very many other words did he testify and exhort them, saying: Save yourselves from this perverse generation. They therefore that receive his word were baptized: and there were added in that day about three thousand souls. And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers. [Acts, 2: 37-42]

According to the inspired word of God in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter exhorted the men who listened to him of that first Christian Pentecost to “save themselves from this perverse generation.” Furthermore, we are told that the individuals who “received his word” received the sacrament of baptism, and that they were “added” to the number of the disciples of Christ who had been with St. Peter and the other disciples before he delivered his sermon. The society of the disciples of Jesus Christ, the organization which we know now as the Catholic Church, continued with this great number of new members, to do exactly what it had been doing since the day of Our Lord's ascension into heaven.

We read that the group, composed as it was of these new converts who had come into the Church as a result of St. Peter's Pentecost sermon and of the disciples who had entered the group during Our Lord's public life, was “persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers.” And we read the same sort of account of the activity of the original band of disciples that returned to Jerusalem immediately after the Ascension.

Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount that is called Olivet, which is nigh Jerusalem, within a sabbath day's journey.

And when they were come in they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Batholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus and Simon Zelotes and Jude the brother of James. 

All these were persevering with one mind in prayer, with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. [Acts 1. 12-14]

Both the text and the context of the Acts of the Apostles assure us that the people who heeded St. Peter's injunction to save themselves from this perverse generation entered the true Church of God, the kingdom of God on earth. They entered the Catholic Church.

Now, if St. Peter's words on this occasion meant anything at all, they signified that the individuals to whom he was speaking were in a situation which would lead them to eternal ruin if they continued in it. They were described as belonging to a “perverse generation.” They were told to save themselves by getting out of it. The institution into which they would enter by the very fact of leaving “this perverse generation” was none other that the society of Our Lord's disciples, the Catholic Church itself.

The clear implication of St. Peter's statement is that the Church, the kingdom of God, was the only institution or social unit of salvation. Not to be within this society was to be in the perverse generation within which a man was faced with eternal and entire spiritual ruin. To leave the perverse generation was to enter the Church.

In other words, the clear teaching of this section of the Acts of the Apostles is precisely that given by Pope Leo XIII in the opening passages of his encyclical Humanum genus. The central point of this teaching is that the entire human race is divided between the kingdom of God, the ecclesia, and the kingdom of Satan. To be saved from the kingdom of Satan is to enter the kingdom of God. In this context it is not difficult to see how, by God's institution, the Catholic Church, the one and only supernatural kingdom of God on earth, is presented as a necessary means for the attainment of salvation. By God's institution the process of salvation itself involves a passage from the kingdom of Satan into the ecclesia.

Now, for the proper understanding of this doctrine, especially in view of the teaching on this subject contained in some recent books and articles, it is imperative to understand the religious condition of the people to whom St. Peter delivered his sermon on that first Christian Pentecost. Again, the Acts of the Apostles contains essentially important information.

This book describes them in general with the statement that “there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven.” The homelands of these men are enumerated in the statement attributed to the multitude itself.

And they were all amazed and wondered saying: Behold, are not all these that speak, Galileans?

And how have we heard, every man, our own tongue wherein we were born?

Parthinians and Medes and Elamites and inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers from Rome, Jews also and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians: we have heard them speak in our own tongues the wonderful works of God. [Acts 2: 7-11.]

According to the text of the Acts, a great many of these people were pilgrims, men and women who had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the great Jewish feast of Pentecost. Our Lord had died on the Cross only a little over seven weeks before St. Peter delivered that sermon, and many of the people who listened to St. Peter must have been on their way to Jerusalem at the very time Our Lord died. They had begun their pilgrimage as an act of worship in the Jewish religion at the very time when the Jewish religion was the one approved especially by God and when the Jewish politico-religious commonwealth was actually the supernatural kingdom of God on earth, the ecclesia of the Old Testament.

These people as individuals probably had nothing whatsoever to do with the persecution and the murder of the Incarnate Word of God. They had started on their journey as members of God's chosen people, the people of His covenant. Their journey to Jerusalem was made precisely in order to worship and honor God. They were truly devout individuals.

Yes, seven weeks before, the religious body to which they belonged had ceased to be God's ecclesia. The Jewish politico-religious social unit had definitively rejected Our Lord, the Messias promised in the Old Testament. This company had hitherto enjoyed its position as God's ecclesias or His congregatio fidelium by virtue of the fact this it had accepted and professed its acceptance of the divine message about the promised Redeemer. In rejecting the Redeemer Himself, this social unit had automatically rejected the teaching God had given about Him. The rejection of this message constituted an abandonment of the divine faith itself. By manifesting this rejection of the faith, the Jewish religious unit fell from its position as the company of the chosen people. It was no longer God's ecclesia, His supernatural kingdom on earth. It became part of the kingdom of Satan.

While the great Jewish social unit was rejecting Our Lord and thus repudiating its acceptance of the divinely revealed message about Him, the little company of the disciples, organized by Our Lord around Himself, retained its faith. It continued to accept and to obey Our Lord and to believe the divinely revealed that centered around Him. Thus at the moment of Our Lord's death on Calvary, the moment when the old dispensation was ended and the Jewish religious association ceased to be the supernatural kingdom of God on earth, this recently organized society of Our Lord's disciples began to exist as the ecclesia or the kingdom.

This society was the true continuation of Israel. The men who were within it were the true sons of Abraham, in that they had the genuine faith of Abraham. This society was the new association of the chosen people. Its members were, as St. Paul called them, the elect or the chosen of God.

It must be understood, incidentally, that this society was actually God's supernatural kingdom on earth in a much more complete and perfect sense than the old Jewish commonwealth had ever been. The old Israel had constituted the pople of the covenant. According to God's unfailing promise, the Redeemer was to be born within that company. Yet conditions had never been such that a man had to be within this company in order to attain to eternal salvation.

On the contrary, the new and faithful Israel was completely identical with the supernatural kingdom of God on earth. It was the true ecclesia or company of the faithful in the sense that no man could attain to eternal salvation unless he passed from this life “within” it. This organized society, within which unworthy members would be intermingled with the good until the end of time, was actually Our Lord's own Mystical Body.

So it was that when St. Peter spoke to the crowd on the first Christian Pentecost, the society of which he had been constituted the visible head was actually the ecclesia Dei, the necessary terminus of the process of salvation. His hearers who, a few weeks before had belonged to God's supernatural kingdom on earth by reason of their membership in the old Israelite commonwealth, now actually found themselves in the “perverse generation” precisely by reason of that same membership. When St. Peter first spoke to them, they were in a position from which they needed to be saved. They were no longer members of the chosen people.

By heeding and obeying the words of St. Peter they regained the position they had formerly possessed, and their new possession of the dignity of membership in the ecclesia was much more perfect and complete than that which they had formerly enjoyed. Previously they had been within a company which had been God's congregatio fidelium by reason of the profession of its acceptance of the divine message that centered around the promise of a Redeemer. When they accepted St. Peter's teaching, performed their duty of penance, and by their reception of the sacrament of baptism, were “added” to the society of Our Lord's disciples, they entered the supernatural kingdom of God which enjoyed its status by reason of its acceptance of the divinely revealed teaching about the Redeemer who had become incarnate and had died to reconcile them with God.

It is extremely important for us to remember, however, that the people St. Peter urged to save themselves from the perverse generation in which they were living at the time were definitely not men of no religion at all. They were devout members of the establishment which had bee, less than eight weeks before, God's supernatural kingdom on earth. In that establishment they had learned love for God and zeal in the service of God that they were willing to travel very considerable distances and undergo serious hardships in order to assist at the temple sacrifices in Jerusalem during the days of the great religious festivity of Pentecost.

St. Peter did not recommend the Church to these people merely as something far more perfect than the religious affiliation they already possessed. He did not in any sense imply that, in entering the ecclesia, they would be simply passing to a better religious community Quite on the contrary, he made it clear that it was necessary for them to transfer themselves from the “perverse generation” in which they than existed to a condition of salvation. The acceptance of his teaching was in fact as entrance into the Church. It is in line with this teaching that St. Paul, in his epistles, refers to those within the Church as “saved.” The Epistle to the Ephesians tells us that God, “even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ (by whose grace you are saved).” [Eph. 2:5.] And it explains that “by grace you are saved through faith: and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God.” [Eph 2:8.] The entire context of the Church, men are actually being saved from the dominion of Satan, the prince of this world.

This is the basic social aspect of the process of salvation. In that process there is always involved a passage or a transitus from the kingdom of God's spiritual enemy into the actual kingdom of God Himself. His ecclesia. St. Peter made it clear that, in entering the Church, the people to whom he was speaking on that first Christian Pentecost were really being saved.

We must not lose sight of the fact that in our own day there is sometimes a tendency to imagine that persons who are in a position comparable with that of the people to whom St. Peter's sermon was addressed are really in an acceptable position. The people who encourage this tendency are careful to state that the Catholic Church is more advantageously placed than other religious bodies in this world. They assert that the Church has the fullness of God's revealed message; but, at the same time, they likewise insist that other religions are really from God, and that they constitute the plenitude of God's teaching for those whom He does not call to the higher position of Catholicism. The Modernist Von Hugel brought out this teaching in a volume recently republished in this country. According to Von Hugel:

The Jewish religion was not false for the thirteen centuries of the pre-Christian operations; it was, for those times, God's fullest self-revelation and man's deepest apprehension of God; and this same Jewish religion can be, is, still the fullest religious truth for numerous individuals whom God leaves in their good faith; in their not directly requiring the fuller, the fullest, light and aid to Christanity. What is specially true of the Jewish religion is, in a lesser but still very real degree, true of Mohammedanism, and even of Hinduism, of Parseeism, etc. [Letters from Baron Freidrich Von Hugel to a Niece (Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1955) . p.115.]

Von Hugel, like other of his class, was careful to insist that “it is not true that all religions are equally true, equally pure, equally fruitful.” But, as a matter of tact, no one but the most militant and ignorant athiest ever claimed that they were. His own position is completely incompatible with the teaching of St. Peter in his sermon on the first Christian Pentecost. He depicted non-Catholic religions as acceptable, even though less perfect than Catholicism. If his contention had been in any way true, then St. Peter would have been guilty of seriously deceiving the people to whom he spoke on that Pentecost morning. Very definitely it is not true to say that a man is saved when he is transferred from a less perfect to a more perfect conditions. He is saved only by being transferred from a ruinous position into a status wherein he can live as he should.

Von Hugel described the religious condition of the people to whom St. Peter spoke as “still the fullest religious truth for numerous individuals whom God leaves in their good faith; in their not directly requiring the fuller, the fullest light and aid to Christianity.” St. Peter asserted that these individuals were in a perverse generation, and told them to save themselves from it. There is no possibility of any agreement between these two positions.

In every age of the Church there has been one portion of Christian doctrine which men have been especially tempted to misconstrue or to deny. In our own times it is the part of the Catholic truth which was brought out with special force and clarity by St. Peter in his first missionary sermon in Jerusalem. It is somewhat unfashionable today to insist, as St. Peter did, that those who are outside the true Church of Jesus Christ stand in need of being saved by leaving their own positions and entering the ecclesia. Nevertheless, this remains a part of God's own revealed message.

It is a part of Catholic doctrine that entrance into the Church (actually by becoming a member of the Church; and when this is impossible, by at least an implicit though sincere desire or intention) is a part of the process of salvation. It is equally a part of Catholic teaching, however, that this is by no means the only part. A man is saved from the evil of belonging to the kingdom of Satan by his entrance into the Church, but this entrance in no way constitutes a guarantee that he will actually enjoy the Beatific Vision for all eternity. The process of salvation is not fully completed, a man cannot be said to be “saved” in the full sense of the term, until he has attained the Beatific Vision itself.

St. James, writing to men who are already Christians, members of the true Church, warns them to “receive the ingrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” [James 1:21] He was setting forth God's own teaching when he reminded those within the Church that they were still obliged to work, under the direction of the divine doctrine, for the salvation of their souls. It remains possible for a man to be within the Church and to be disloyal to God. Such a man constitutes himself as an unworthy member of the Church and, unless he repents of his sins, he will be cut away from the kingdom of God for all eternity. When he dies. And, if the sinner within the Church turns again toward God, he is being saved by the power of Jesus Christ, working through the sacrament of penance. Obviously he cannot be saved other than in and through the Catholic Church.

Thus, despite the fact that it is possible for a man to be within the Church and to lose his soul, salvation is in itself a process which involves a social aspect. Everyone who has been born since the sin of Adam, with the exception of Our Lord and of His Blessed Mother, has come into the world or begun his existence as a member of the fallen family of Adam, and thus as one who belong to what St. Peter designated as the “perverse generation” and what Pope Leo XIII called the “kingdom of Satan.”

He has likewise begun his existence as a human being in the state of original sin and has very frequently increased his aversion from God by the force of his own mortal sins. The process of salvation is the process by which such men have been brought from that condition of aversion from God into the final and inamissible possession of His friendship and the enjoyment of the Beatific Vision. Involved in that process, by God's own institution, is a transfer from the kingdom of Satan into the one supernatural kingdom of god on earth. Since the moment of Our Lord's death on the Cross, that kingdom has been, again by God's own institution, the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ on earth.

Thus, if we examine the actual concept of salvation, we find that the Church as God's kingdom on earth is actually involved in it. Thus, in this process, the Church is not merely an extraneous factor which has been somehow introduced into the Christian teaching about eternal salvation. It is, in the social aspect of salvation, the necessary terminus ad quem of that transfer by which men are brought for sin to grace, by being changed from a position of belonging to the kingdom of Satan, the dominion of “the prince of this world,” into the one and only supernatural kingdom of God on earth. (Monsignor Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation In Light of the Recent Pronouncements of the Holy See, published in 1958 and reprinted in 2006 by Seminary Press, Round Top, New York, p. 134-144.)