There are three reasons why this commentary has been delayed.
First, last week was Holy Week.
Second, last week was Holy Week.
Third, last week was Holy Week.
The adversary, seeking to distract us from the events of our redemption, delights in agitating Catholics with provocations to put aside the sacredness of the very week of weeks during which Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the very Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity made Man in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother, in order to rivet their attention on the various dog and pony shows in the world that are dressed up to appear as so very “important” as to justify diverting our eyes from the Passion and Death of the Divine Redeemer.
I, for, one, am too old now to fall for these tricks, and I have learned enough—just enough—to know that most Catholics, no matter where they fall along the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide during this time of apostasy and betrayal, don’t want to consider the simple truth that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of order in the souls of men and thus in the world. Nearly a thousand of the over two thousand articles on this website have dealt with the farcical nature of what passes for “politics” in a world shaped by Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry. Indeed, a two-part review of the Father Edward Cahill’s Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part one and To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part two, which I will reformat for posting on this site’s current software platform in the near future, provided a pretty thorough summary of the role that the Talmudists have played in helping to institutionalize the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of their relentless, diabolically-inspired efforts to institutionalize naturalism as the foundation of personal thought and social structures.
One passage from Father Cahill’s book, which was based upon a series of articles that he had published in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record in 1929, has particular relevance to the fraudulent nature of the manufactured crises that are produced to rivet the attention of those who believe that the gladiatorial combat between the “conservatives” and “liberals” actually represents some kind of “holy war” between good and evil in the United States of America and elsewhere in the world:
Although during the eighteenth century the number of Jews in the Masonic lodges were few, the prejudice against them was lessened or eliminated as a result of the movement towards Jewish emancipation, which was itself largely due to Liberal and Masonic influence; and since the middle of the nineteenth century the Cabalistic Jewish element has become predominant at least in Continental Freemasonry. Thus, while Jews are still excluded from the so-called ‘Christian’ lodges of Germany, the influence of the latter is now overshadowed by those lodges which admit Jews, and in which the Jewish element more or less prevails. Even in 1900 there were at least 800 such lodges in the German Empire exclusive of the B’ne Berith lodges, which are entirely Jewish. So marked, indeed, is the dominance of the Jewish element in German Freemasonry that the Masonic Journal Latomia (February, 1928) quotes a saying of Ludendorf: ‘The Freemasons are the henchmen of the Jews.’
It was Jews that introduced Freemasonry into the United States of America; and Jews have always been a powerful influence in the American Masonic organizations. Again, the Masonic rite of Mizraim which includes no less than ninety degrees and is, perhaps, the most esoteric and highly elaborated of all the Masonic rites, has been founded by Jews. So also has been the order of B’ne Berith (‘Sons of the Alliance ‘), and several other organizations of a similar type. The Masonic rite of Mizraim belongs mainly to Europe, and some of its lodges are exclusively Jewish. The order of B’ne Berith, which is altogether Jewish, is (or rather was up to some twenty years ago) mainly American, and if not formally and professedly Masonic, bears a striking resemblance to Freemasonry, in its organization and avowed objects, and is in intimate alliance with Masonry.
The indications of a close connexion or working alliance between Freemasonry and important sections of the Jews are innumerable.
Masonry [writes the Jewish Chronicle (October 29, 1889) ] tolerates everything except a narrow clericalism [viz. Catholicisim] and it possesses a special attraction for the Jews. . . . Clericalism has always persecuted Masonry everywhere it can . . . and the spirit of persecution has attracted the Jews towards Masonry by an invisible but potent bond of sympathy. There exists between them a natural alliance against a common enemy, . . . Together they fight, oftentimes with success, against religious fanaticism and racial antipathies. In London there are no less than five Jewish lodges. There are some also at Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester.
It is nearly half a century ago since a well-known British review called attention to the dominant influence of the Jews, not only in politics, the press, and international finance, but also in the revolutionary outbreaks of the century.
The influence of the Jews at the present time is more noticeable than ever. That they are at the head of European capitalism, we are all aware. … In politics many of the Jews are in the front rank. . . . That their excessive wealth, used as it has been, acts as a solvent influence in modern society cannot be questioned. . . . But while on the one hand the Jews are thus beyond dispute the leaders of the autocracy of Europe . . . another section of the same race form the leaders of that revolutionary propaganda which is making way against that very capitalist class, representing their own fellow Jews. Jews, more than any other men . . . are acting as the leaders in the revolutionary movement which I have endeavoured to trace. (Father E. Cahill, S.J., “Freemasonry: VI: The Jewish Element in Freemasonry, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 1929.)
Father Cahill was merely echoing in the highlighted material at the end of this lengthy passage what others had said before him. Among those who were astute enough and courageous enough to point out the role of the Universal Israelite Alliance to shape electoral politics, public policy, civil law, education and culture in the United States of America were two French clerics, Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, who was the Bishop of Poitiers, France from from May 23, 1849, to the time of his death on May 18, 1880, and Monsignor Henri Delassus.
To Cardinal Pie first as quoted in Father Théotimede Saint Just’s book that was translated from French into English by Mr. Daniel Leonardi and published by the Catholic Action Center:
Accordingly, the Bishop of Poitiers had always fought against THE SEPARATION OF Church and State. Moreover, he opposed all separations, that of reason and faith, of nature and grace, of natural religion and revealed religion, the separation of the philosopher and the Christian, of private man and public man. He saw in all these [separations] a resurgence of Manichean dualism and he had fought all these with, the supreme argument, the law formed by Christ. Therefore, it is in all truth, writing to [Minister of the Interior] the Count of Presigny, that he could render this testimony:
‘We have nothing in common with the theorists of disunion and opposition of two orders, temporal and spiritual, natural and supernatural. We struggle, on the contrary, with all our strength against these doctrines of separation which is leading to the denial of religion itself and of revealed religion.’”
Fr. de St. Just returns at this point and introduces us to what is perhaps Msgr. Pie’s strongest language, with regard to this entire subject:
“To this doctrine of the Church, which Msgr. Pie brought to the mind of the rulers of nations, the liberals would oppose acts favoring separation.
“Certain countries, Belgium and America, for example, haven’t they proclaimed the separation of Church and State, and doesn’t the Church enjoy a more complete liberty under such a system?”
Cardinal Pie responded firmly to this question:
‘THE AMERICAN AND BELGIUM SYSTEM, this system of philosophical-political indifference, shall eternally be a bastard system” (pp. 122-124 in Fr. de St. Just’s book) (Selected Writings of Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie of Poitiers, Catholic Action Resource Center, Orlando, Florida, October, 2007, pp. 21-23.)
As I have noted so many times before, Barack Hussein Obama is merely the end product of Americanism, which is itself an expression of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry. Our current caesar’s efforts to exploit the inherent degeneracy of the founding principles have emboldened and helped to coalesce all manner of nefarious forces that have at work to mandate the acceptance of sin, starting with the sin of rank unbelief in accord with the falsehood known as “religious freedom,” in the name of “diversity” and “toleration.” The current caesar and his minions have also made it more possible than ever before to enable and these coalesced forces of pure Judeo-Masonic evil to use all legal and cultural means at their disposal to persecute anyone who stands out in opposition to two of the sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance to vengeance: the execution of the innocent preborn, whether by chemical or surgical means, and sodomy.
The full fury of Hell was let loose last week, Holy Week, against legislators in two states, Indiana and Arkansas, where feeble efforts had been made to provide merchants such as bakers, restauranteurs, florists and photographers/videographers with a means to defend themselves on “religious freedom” grounds when forced to recognize “weddings” or “anniversaries” or other “special events” for those engaged in perverse, unnatural sins against the binding precepts of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. As Judge Andrew Napolitano pointed out in a column last week that I reviewed only prior to writing this article, the original version of the so-called "religious freedom restoration" law in Indiana would never have withstood constitutional muster if it had been challenged, which was sure to be the case, and worked its way up eventually to the Supreme Court of the United States of America:
The federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in housing and public accommodations based upon race, gender, religion, beliefs or national origin, and quite properly permits no religious-based defense.
In response to the invalidation of RFRA, many states enacted their own form of RFRA, and most states added sexual orientation to the litany of prohibited bases for discrimination in public accommodations and housing.
Indiana has not added the prohibition on discrimination based on sexual orientation; yet its own RFRA statute, signed into law last week, provides a "my religion made me do it" defense to allegations of discrimination based on sexual orientation. Hence the belief and fear that the Indiana statute is an affirmative attempt to provide a lawful basis for such discrimination.
Such an attempt would surely run afoul of the Supreme Court's invalidation of a Colorado constitutional provision that purported to do the same in Romer v. Evans (1996).
The legal issues attendant upon the judicial enforcement of this Indiana statute are enormously complex. They would amount to judges determining the centrality and sincerity of a person's claimed religious practices to the core teachings of his religion.
This type of determination by judges could only come about by an inquiry unknown in American jurisprudence ("Is this really taught by your church?" "Do you really believe this?" "How is your refusal to sell goods or services to this person central to your religious beliefs?") and prohibited by the Free Exercise Clause, which the courts have held bars such judicial inquiries.
In the days before the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, the late Sen. Barry Goldwater offered a neutral, nonracist common-law argument based on morality and property rights against that landmark legislation. He articulated the view that a seller of goods or services or real estate has a natural right to decide to whom he wishes to sell, free from government commands.
Goldwater paraphrased Thomas Jefferson, who argued that the only moral commercial transaction is one truly voluntary on the part of the buyer and the seller.
That argument has an attractive leave-me-alone appeal to it; yet, the public policy of the nation since 1964 has unambiguously rejected it.
Today in America, if you operate a public accommodation or deal in real estate, you cannot choose your customers; they choose you. This Indiana statute is arguably an effort to bring back the pre-1964 days with respect to sexual orientation.
Because discrimination based on sexual orientation is not prohibited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Indiana and all other states are free to prohibit it or to look the other way in the face of it. But they are not free to encourage it or to make it lawful. (Judge Napolitano on the March 26, 2015, Indiana Restoration of Religious Liberty Law.)
This is a very fine analysis concerning the actual state of the law at this time in the United States of America.
What Judge Napolitano does not address, perhaps because he does not think in supernatural terms, is the fact that the very existence of a “controversy” concerning the civil law’s formal recognition of perversity as a basis of human self-identification is the direct, inevitable consequence of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and institutionalized by the multifaceted, interrelated forces of Judeo-Masonic naturalism. There is no rational foundation by which the advance of perverse evils can be opposed by merely natural means once the sentimentality and individualism of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonic naturalism take deep and abiding root in the law, institutions and social fabric of a nation.
Pope Leo XIII explained the consequences of a purely secular form of the administration of law and public policy:
A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. "If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he burneth" john xv., 6). "He that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
Political and social systems based on naturalism must degenerate over the course of time. Without the sure guidance of Holy Mother Church in all that pertains to the good of souls and without her sanctifying offices, men must fall into Pelagianism, believing that they can “resolve” most of the problems of the world purely on the basis of human reason and ingenuity without any reference to the true religion or reliance upon the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Crucified and Risen Redeemer, Christ the King, and that flow into human souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.
Pope Leo XIII had warned of the inexorable logic of religious indifferentism exactly fifteen years before he issued Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus:
To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
The foolishness of today’s Pelagians of today, of course, has resulted in the exact circumstances described by Pope Leo XIII in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus in 1900 as practical atheism has replaced even some kind of “generic” Christianity, not that such a thing exists, as the foundation of law and public policy, something for which the Talmudists have striven with particular zeal in the past six decades now. Citizens are permitted to hold religious beliefs, but it should be pretty clear by now that speaking about them publicly and using them as the basis for social intercourse has become a “hate” crime in the eyes of many public officials, whether elected or appointed. Such is the triumph of the spirit of Judeo-Masonry in our land and in the world, a triumph that has been, as noted earlier in this commentary, aided in no small measure by the ethos of conciliarism, whose chief spokesman at this time, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, is steeped in each of the errors of Modernity with which his Modernist sect have made their “official reconciliation.”
To wit, not a single voice from the counterfeit church of conciliarism has risen in support of Kevin and Maureen O’Connor, owners of Memories Pizza and Ice Cream of Walkerton, Indiana, as they faced death threats after telling a television reporter, Alyssa Mano, that, although they would never deny service to a self-identified practitioner of perversity, they could never deliver pizzas to a “wedding” between people of the same gender. The baptized Catholic turned Mormon, Glenn Beck, spearheaded an effort to raise funds for the couple after all manner of “tolerant” people denounced them for answering a question forthrightly in accord with their beliefs, which just happen to be in accord with the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law:
WALKERTON, Ind. -- A business in Walkerton is getting national attention and backlash following its statements and stance on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Memories Pizza is on the record saying it wouldn't cater gay weddings, and that stance has gone viral online.
“I don’t have a problem with gay people, I do not condone gay marriage and that’s what I said,” co-owner Kevin O’Connor explained to The Daily Beast. “I don’t turn anybody away from the store, I don’t have a problem with gay people. I just don’t condone the marriage.”
Co-owner Crystal O'Connor talked with TheBlaze Wednesday evening.
"I don't know if we will re-open," she said when asked about the backlash the business has received. She also said her family is considering leaving town. "We're in hiding, basically."
"We're very hurt and confused," she added. "We stood up for what we believe. We said we would serve anyone who walked in the door -- even gays -- but we would not condone a wedding, we would not cater for it because that's against our religious beliefs." ('We're very hurt and
When did all of this happen?
Last week, Holy Week, saw the Indiana State Legislature’s efforts to use the heresy of “religious liberty” as the foundation to provide merchants such as the O’Connors with a legal defense if sued for refusing to serve practitioners of perversity on religious grounds come under national fire. As Judge Napolitano noted, the original "restoration of religious freedom" law would not have withstood constitutional muster at the Supreme Court of the United States of America. The ensuing maelstrom was such that Indiana Governor Michael Richard “Mike” Pence, whose mother’s family were Catholics, backed off from the “religious freedom restoration” bill that he had signed on Thursday, March 26, 2015, and used Maundy Thursday, April 2, 2015, to sign a “fix” to the law that makes it illegal for service providers to deny service to customers on the basis of “sexual orientation”:
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence urged residents to "move forward together" Thursday after signing off on revisions to a new religious objections law that had sparked criticism that it would allow discrimination against gays.
Lawmakers and business leaders worked together to craft an amendment that prohibits service providers from using the law as a legal defense for refusing to provide services, goods, facilities or accommodations. It also bars discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry, age, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or U.S. military service.
The measure exempts churches and affiliated schools, along with nonprofit religious organizations.
Many groups that had criticized the version of the law signed by Pence hailed the new language. But others said it was worse than the original and could lead to bigger problems.
"There will be some who think this legislation goes too far and some who think it does not go far enough," Pence acknowledged in a statement after signing the amended legislation. "I believe resolving this controversy and making clear that every person feels welcome and respected in our state is best for Indiana."
SHOW OF SUPPORT
Two of Indiana's largest business groups praised the changes.
Indiana Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Kevin Brinegar said Indiana "has suffered tremendously" during the past week's uproar and that the new language is "what businesses and individuals from around the state, country and world needed to hear."
Indy Chamber President and CEO Michael Huber called the changes "a major step in the right direction in efforts to protect the rights of all Hoosiers."
And NCAA President Mark Emmert said the association was "very pleased" with the changes. The Indianapolis-based NCAA was among the first to express concern about the law when it was passed last week. The Final Four is being held in Indianapolis this weekend, and Emmert said the NCAA would consider moving future events out of state if the law wasn't revised.
The women's Final Four is scheduled to be held in Indianapolis next year.
Opponents of the changes said they didn't go far enough and could do more harm than good.
Democratic lawmakers called for a repeal of the law Thursday, urging lawmakers to start from scratch.
"I want to hear somebody say, 'We made a grave mistake, and we caused the state tremendous embarrassment that will take months, if not years, to repair,'" House Minority Leader Scott Pelath said. "I want to hear one of the proponents 'fess up, because the healing cannot begin until that happens."
Consumer reporting agency Angie's List, which announced it was putting a planned $40 million expansion on hold over the law, also called for a repeal.
"Employers in most of the state of Indiana can fire a person simply for being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning. That's just not right and that's the real issue here. Our employees deserve to live, work and travel with open accommodations in any part of the state," said CEO Bill Oesterle.
Micah Clark of the American Family Association of Indiana said the Legislature's actions didn't clarify the law as Pence had requested but instead changed it in "a way that could now erode religious freedom across Indiana."
"If this revised law does not adequately protect religious liberty for all, it is not really a religious freedom act," Clark said.
Mark Rienzi, senior counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty in Washington, D.C., said the new language "carves up religious rights" and that the state would be better off if it adopted the language in the 1993 federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Many groups said the changes are a good first step but urged lawmakers to do more, including adding protections for sexual orientation and gender identity to the state's civil-rights law.
The American Civil Liberties Union said the changes have lessened the harm of the law but that "significant problems" still need to be addressed, including whether the law can be used to deny rights to others, including in education and access to health care.
The group's state affiliate noted that the amendment marks the first time that Indiana law has included positive references to sexual orientation and gender identity. But it said statewide civil-rights protections are still needed.
Two gay rights groups, Freedom Indiana and Lambda Legal, also called for broader protections.
Freedom Indiana campaign manager Katie Blair said the changes "represent an important step forward" and reduce the threat to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender residents.
But she said that without statewide anti-discrimination laws for the LGBT community, "discrimination is still legal" in most of Indiana. (Pence signs religious freedom bill fix.)
One wonders if Governor Pence has his finger bowl handy on Maundy Thursday as he signed the "fix" into law.
In other words, Indiana Governor Mike Pence threw in the towel as a result of the financial pressure, much of it engendered by the same insidious organization that supports illegal immigration, the United States Chamber of Commerce, and lobbying by lavender Nazis such as Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook, who is an aggressive, in-your-face advocate of the perversity that he practices, and the usually array of “human rights” organizations. Absent the true Faith, good readers, sentimentality must triumph as sins of all manner, including those against nature, are celebrated culturally and protected under cover of the civil law. The fact that such a monstrous thing as “gay marriage” has swept its way into law and into widespread public approval is the result of the very heresy of “religious liberty” that the conciliar “popes,” including Jorge Mario Bergoglio, have told us repeatedly is the “key” to “peace” even though Pope Pius VI called it a “monstrous right”:
The necessary effect of the constitution decreed by the Assembly is to annihilate the Catholic Religion and, with her, the obedience owed to Kings. With this purpose it establishes as a right of man in society this absolute liberty that not only insures the right to be indifferent to religious opinions, but also grants full license to freely think, speak, write and even print whatever one wishes on religious matters – even the most disordered imaginings. It is a monstrous right, which the Assembly claims, however, results from equality and the natural liberties of all men.
But what could be more unwise than to establish among men this equality and this uncontrolled liberty, which stifles all reason, the most precious gift nature gave to man, the one that distinguishes him from animals?
After creating man in a place filled with delectable things, didn’t God threaten him with death should he eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil? And with this first prohibition didn’t He establish limits to his liberty? When, after man disobeyed the command and thereby incurred guilt, didn’t God impose new obligations on him through Moses? And even though he left to man’s free will the choice between good and evil, didn’t God provide him with precepts and commandments that could save him “if he would observe them”? …
Where then, is this liberty of thinking and acting that the Assembly grants to man in society as an indisputable natural right? Is this invented right not contrary to the right of the Supreme Creator to whom we owe our existence and all that we have? Can we ignore the fact that man was not created for himself alone, but to be helpful to his neighbor? …
“Man should use his reason first of all to recognize his Sovereign Maker, honoring Him and admiring Him, and submitting his entire person to Him. For, from his childhood, he should be submissive to those who are superior to him in age; he should be governed and instructed by their lessons, order his life according to their laws of reason, society and religion. This inflated equality and liberty, therefore, are for him, from the moment he is born, no more than imaginary dreams and senseless words.” (Pope Pius VI, Brief Quod aliquantum, March 10, 1791; Religious Liberty, a “Monstrous Right“).
What Pope Pius VI declared to be a monstrous right and an invented right has been hailed by the conciliar “popes,” including Ratzinger and Bergoglio, as a “sacred” right. Something that is monstrous and invented in 1791 does not become sacred in 1965 with the issuance of Dignitatis Humanae, December 7, 1965, and thus a cornerstone as a foundation for world peace. The Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, had to have hidden this supposed “truth” for over one thousand nine hundred thirty-two years prior to its proclamation at the “Second” Vatican Council.
It is essential to remember that there is no merely natural, religiously indifferentist, socially ecumenical or "non-denominational" way to retard the spread of evil as it is those very falsehoods that has made the triumph of such moral evils as ready divorce, contraception, abortion, vital body member harvesting, euthanasia and sodomy possible, and will one day result in the social acceptance of perverse relationships with minor children and polygamy inevitable. Without the Catholic Faith, ladies and gentlemen, and the Social Reign of Christ the King, men are destined to fall into the abyss. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool (yes, a fool) for refusing to look clearly at the level of tolerance and acceptance of evil has been reached within most countries of the supposedly "civilized" Western world, including the United States of America.
We do not need to tarry too long to reiterate the simple fact that it is not the "rights of man" or "states' rights" that matter. What matters are the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as they have been entrusted to and taught infallibly by the Catholic Church.
Father Denis Fahey, writing in his The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, explained that we cannot be neutral in the battle between the reign of man and the Social Reign of Christ the King:
We can thus easily see that the entrance of Christianity into the world has meant two things. Primarily and principally, it has meant the constitution of a supernatural society, the Mystical Body of Christ, absolutely transcending every natural development of culture and civilisation. Secondly, it has had as result that this supernatural society, the Catholic Church, began to exercise a profound influence upon culture and civilisation and modified in a far-reaching way the existing temporal or natural social order. The indirect power of the Church over temporal affairs, whenever the interests of the divine life of souls are involved, presupposes, of course, a clear distinction of nature between the ecclesiastical authority, charged with the care of divine things, and the civil authority, whose mission is concerned with purely temporal matters. In proportion as the Mystical Body of Christ was accepted by mankind, political and economic thought and action began to respect the jurisdiction and guidance of the Catholic Church, endowed, as she is, with the right of intervention in temporal affairs whenever necessary, because of her participation in the spiritual kingship of Christ. Thus the natural or temporal common good of states came to be sought in a manner calculated to favour the development of true personality, in and through the Mystical Body of Christ, and social life came more and more under the influence of the supreme end of man, the vision of God in the three divine Persons.
Accordingly, the divine plan for order in our fallen and redeemed world comprises, primarily, the supernatural social organism of the Catholic Church, and then, secondarily, the temporal or natural social order resulting from the influence of Catholic doctrine on politics and economics and from the embodiment of that influence in social institutions. From the birth of the Catholic Church on Calvary and the solemn promulgation of her mission at the first Pentecost, the Kingdom of God in its essence has been present in the world. As a result of the gradual acceptance of the role of the Church by the temporal representatives of Christ the King, the social institutions of states and nations became deeply permeated with the influence of the supernatural life of Christ. Then, and only then, could the Kingdom of God in its integrity or the rule of Christ the King in its integrity, be said to exist. The Kingdom of God or the rule of Christ the King is present in its integrity only in so far as the whole social life of states, political and economic, is permeated with the influence of the Church. To put it in other terms, Christ fully reigns only when the programme for which He died is accepted as the one true way to peace and order in the world, and social structures in harmony with it are evolved.
The Kingdom of God in its essence is always with us, but the influence of the Church on politics and economics, in other words, the extension of the Kingdom of God in its integrity, has varied with the centuries. Broadly speaking, the thirteenth century has been, so far, the high water mark of that influence. Since then, until recently, there has been steady decay. No particular temporal social order, of course, will ever realise all that the Church is capable of giving to the world. Each of them will be defective for several reasons.
First of all, the action of the Church, welcomed by some Catholics, will be opposed by the ignorance, incapacity and perversity of others.
Secondly, even if all Catholics did accept fully, they could only reflect some of the beauty of the Gospel as the saints reflected some of the infinitely imitable holiness of Christ.
Thirdly, there would still remain the vast number of non-Catholics to be won for Christ and have their social life organised under His rule. It is towards this latter goal that every generation of Catholics is called upon to work. The aim is not, needless to say, to bring back the Middle Ages, for the river of time does not turn back in its course, but the aim is to impregnate a new epoch with the divine principles of order so firmly grasped in the thirteenth century. The result of the so-called Reformation and the French Revolution has been to obscure the rights of God proclaimed by our Lord Jesus Christ and to diffuse naturalism.
Naturalism consists in the negation of the possibility of the elevation of our nature to the supernatural life and order, or more radically still, in the negation of the very existence of that life and order. In our day owing to the progress of the anti-Christian revolt, the more radical meaning has become common. Naturalism may be defined therefore as the attitude of mind which denies the reality of the divine life of grace and of our Fall therefrom by original sin. It rejects our consequent liability to revolt against the order of the divine life, when this life has been restored to us by our membership of Christ, and maintains that all social life should be organized on the basis of that denial. We must combat that mentality and proclaim the rights of God.
In his Encyclical letter on Freemasonry, Pope Leo XIII teaches authoritatively: “From what we have already set forth, it is indisputably evident that their [the Freemasons’] ultimate aim is to uproot completely the whole religious and political order of the world, which has been brought into existence by Christianity, and to replace it by another in harmony with their way of thinking. This will mean that the foundation and the laws of the new structure of society will be drawn from pure naturalism.” Now, it is historically certain that the Declaration of the Rights of Man had been conceived and elaborated in the Masonic lodges before it was presented to the States-General of France. Accordingly, the infamous Declaration, a naturalistic or anti-supernatural document, is in reality a declaration of war on membership of Christ and on the whole structure of society based on that supernatural dignity. The same naturalistic hostility to membership of Christ and the supernatural life of grace runs through all the documents concerning human rights drawn up under the influence of the organised forces that were responsible for the Declaration of 1789. That is the real struggle going on in the world, and in it every member of Christ is called upon to play his or her part. There can be no neutrality. “He that is not with me is against me ” (St. Matthew XII, 30.) (Father Denis Fahey, The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World.)
In other words, it is not possible to retard social evils by naturalistic means. Evils are the only thing that result from naturalism. It is thus impossible to retard the spread of one grave social evil after another by sterile arguments based in the tortured reasoning of legal positivists in a country whose "bottom line" is the text of a written constitution, as subject to misinterpretation and/or deconstruction as Holy Writ is the hands of Protestants, Modernist Catholics and rationalists, that admits of no higher authority beyond itself. As I have been writing and lecturing for decades now, all must fall apart absent the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by Holy Mother Church in all that pertains to the good of souls.
Catholics would do well to read Father Peter Gallwey’s analysis of the dangers that Catholics face living in a Protestant world, thus echoing in his day the voices of Father Frederick William Faber before him and Jesuit contemporaries of his such as Father Edwards Leen, S.J.:
Zeal is a virtue specially odious to the luxurious and self-indulgent men and women of the world, to those of whom Sophonias speaks: The men settled on their lees; the men who wish to enjoy present good things and not be disturbed. Ecclesiasticus describes such a one as the man that hath peace in his possessions; that is at rest; whose ways are prosperous in all things, and that is yet able to take meat (Ecclus. xli.), that is, to enjoy life. Zeal is a troublesome and odious virtue to such men. It censures them, and it sets a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother (St. Matt. x.). To all Catholics who are ambitious to serve two masters, that is, to stand well with the Protestant world and with God, zeal is a most unpleasant virtue. They were getting on very well till the over-zeal of the Ultramontanes roused up the Protestant spirit against Papal aggression. Surely, they cry out with indignation, Christ’s Gospel is a Gospel of peace and brotherhood. They forget that it is Christ Himself Who says: Do not think that I have come to send peace upon earth. I came not to send peace, but the sword (St. Matt. x.).
But did not angels, so they contend, sing round the Crib: Peace on earth? Yes; but they spoke of that peace which the world cannot give; that peace which passeth understanding. The peace of the saints, the peace of the martyrs, is always a peace which passeth understanding. The peace of the saints, the peace of the martyrs, is always won by hard fighting. It is not at all like the effeminate peace of those who are settled on their lees (Sophon. i.); that is, of those who peace consists in gratifying, without being disturbed, the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life; that most fragile peace which the thief can steal, and the moth consume, and which perishes when “the husks of swine, with which they fain would fill their bellies, no man will give to them” (St. Luke xv.). (Father P. Gallwey, The Watches of the Sacred Passion with Before and After, Volume I, published by Maressa Press, Roehampton, England, 1930, pp. 152-155.)
The “battle,” such as it ever was, to reclaim “traditional values” is over. Done with. Through. Decades of indoctrination in public (and many conciliar-controlled) schools, colleges, universities, professional schools, “music,” motion pictures and the channels of supposed “news” and information” has won the day. Moral relativism is triumphant. Legal positivism is triumphant. Statism is triumphant. Upon what rational basis does anyone, no less a believing Catholic, think that the advance of one moral evil after another is going to be retarded at the ballot box when the “pope” shows his full support for those who have undergone the bodily mutilation of “gender change” and goes so far as to wash the feet of one such unfortunate soul on Maundy Thursday?
Even believing Catholics permit themselves to be drawn into the devil's side shows during Holy Week, forever looking for "good guys" to fight the "bad guys" and winding up permitting themselves to be deceived time and time and time again without fail.
Then again, almost no one, including many of those who read the articles on this site, actually believe that what Pope Saint Pius X wrote in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910, applies to the United States of America:
Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.
This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them than a neutral association? What are we to think of this appeal to all the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove the excellence of their convictions in the social sphere in a sort of apologetic contest? Has not this contest lasted for nineteen centuries in conditions less dangerous for the faith of Catholics? And was it not all to the credit of the Catholic Church? What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the Sillonists who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim their personal faith, certainly do not intend to silence others nor do they intend to prevent a Protestant from asserting his Protestantism, and the skeptic from affirming his skepticism. Finally, what are we to think of a Catholic who, on entering his study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to alarm his comrades who, “dreaming of disinterested social action, are not inclined to make it serve the triumph of interests, coteries and even convictions whatever they may be”? Such is the profession of faith of the New Democratic Committee for Social Action which has taken over the main objective of the previous organization and which, they say, “breaking the double meaning which surround the Greater Sillon both in reactionary and anti-clerical circles”, is now open to all men “who respect moral and religious forces and who are convinced that no genuine social emancipation is possible without the leaven of generous idealism.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
The madness of 2016 is underway, a madness that will pretend to auger “better things” for the United States of America while ignoring the sacred rights of Christ the King and the pursuit of the common temporal good in light of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven. Meanwhile, of course, so many ordinary people follow the advice of Martin Luther and of Bergoglio himself to “sin, and sin boldly” while believing that such “bold sin” has no effect on them or upon their nation.
We must have confidence in Our Lady, consecrating ourselves to her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life. The only election that really matters is the one that took place in the Baptismal font when we were elected to be citizens of Heaven. There is only one judicial verdict that matters: that of Christ the King upon our immortal souls at the moment of our Particular Judgment.
This is our destiny, please God and by the graces that flow forth from the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother we persevere to the points of our dying breaths in states of Sanctifying Grace.
No matter the results of a particular election or the results of a particular plebiscite or distraction from the devil during Holy Week, we can be assured that our efforts to restore the Social Reign of Christ the King by means of our total consecration to Him through Mary our Immaculate Queen will help to plant a few seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the true Faith as we, recidivist sinners that we are, attempt to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, remembering to say each day:
O Jesus, it is for love of Thee, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary."
These are the words spoken by the Mother of God in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, on July 13, 1917, nearly ninety-eight years ago. They should be on our lips at all times so that there will come a day when the words uttered by the Cristeros in Mexico and the brave Catholics during the Spanish Revolution will be on the lips of all men and heralded on the flags of all nations:
Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.