Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us

                September 11, 2012


Appealing To Everything But Christ the King

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The madness that took place on Doctor Moreau's Island of Lost Reprobates last week in Charlotte, North Carolina, is now over. As is typical, however, the hysteria continues. The hysteria over the current madness may continue after the elections on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, if the results are as close as they were twelve years when voting ended on Tuesday, November 7, 2000. I do not think that the election will be stalemated. If there is a clear result, then look for the hysteria associated with the 2016 circus of midget naturalists to commence immediately. And on and on on it goes in this land of this truly needless strife

Although many of the points that will be made in this commentary have been discussed in hundreds upon hundreds of articles on this site, I am, as always, very conscious of the fact that there might be a few new readers and that there might be some longtime readers who had forgotten what they have read in the past and/or might permit themselves to get so caught up and overwrought in the hysteria of the moment as to think that this election cycle is "different" than any of the fifty-five that have preceded it. This is why I will attempt to summarize a few salient points about the situation we face before discussing a few of the specifics from last week assortment of lost souls that took place in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Do Not Get Lost in the Trees: This Has Been Is Now and Will Forever Be A System of False Opposites

Yes, the assortment of naturalists that met last week in Charlotte, North Carolina, was offensive from beginning to end. However,  the only difference between the assortment of the naturalists of the false opposite of the "left" at the Democratic National Convention and that of the false opposite of the naturalist "right that had met the previous week in Tampa, Florida was the degree of the offensiveness displayed.

"Rock" music was featured at both conventions.

Statism was featured at both conventions.

Immodesty was on display in both conventions.

God was referred in terms of complete indifferentism in both conventions. Yes, even Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero uttered the meaningless words "God bless these United States of America" while his hapless, focus-group programmed opponent, Willard Mitt Romney, mentioned "God" once in his own acceptance address ("God bless Neil Armstrong"). Please re-read One Party Mocks God, The Other Boos Him.

Speakers who support the chemical and surgical assassination of children as a matter of principle appeared at both conventions, although the one in Charlotte, North Carolina, differed in this respect by openly boasting of its support for baby-killing (for reasons that will be explained below). Indeed, Kerry Healey, who is completely and unapologetically pro-abortion, spoke on Thursday, August 30, 2012, at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida (the night after the pro-abortion Condoleeza Rice spoke), in behalf of the man whom he served as lieutenant governor for four years the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Willard Mitt Romney. She was not disqualified from speaking because, of course, Romney, believes that abortion is a "divisive" issue about which we can disagree.

In-your-face supporters of the State of Israel spoke at both conventions, although the Democratic Party soiree had quite a row over the party's platform position concerning the status of the city of Jerusalem that angered Zionists and was exploited by the bought-and-paid-for agents of Israel within the Republican Party. (For the record, Jerusalem belongs to the Catholic Church. See, that was easy to resolve.)

Most importantly, both conventions featured speakers who believe in naturalism and had platforms that are this year what all such platforms have been in the past and will be in the future: programs of human self-redemption, differing only by the specific path of naturalism to be pursued. They are simply false opposites of each other.

What do I mean by this?

Well, let me remind you in case you have forgotten or have permitted the hysteria of the moment to bend your mind a bit:

I refer to the "false opposites" of the "left" and the "right" because, despite their differences over  the powers "government" over that of the "individual," both the "left" and the "right" reject Catholicism as the one and only foundation of personal and social order. The adherents of the "left" and the "right" believe that it is neither prudent or necessary to acknowledge that the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother has changed human history. Such adherents also reject any suggestions that both men and their nations must be subordinate to Christ the King and the authority of His true Church on all that pertains to the good of souls and that the civil government has an obligation to pursue the common temporal good in light of man's Last End.

No matter the differences between "conservatives" and "liberals," my friends, they both have one mind and one heart in the belief that man does not need the teaching and sanctifying offices of the Catholic Church to guide them in their private and social lives. This is, of course, the triumph of the Judeo-Masonic spirit of naturalism that was dissected so well by Pope Leo XIII. It matters little as to who is or is not a formally enrolled member of the "lodges" when most Catholics and non-Catholics alike are infected with the ethos of naturalism.

Similarly, any civil leader who believes that can, either by himself or with others, pursue genuine order without the help of Our Lady and the use of her Most Holy Rosary is a fool. We must give public honor to Christ the King and to Mary our Immaculate Queen.


Those who followed the proceedings of the conventions of these two false opposites will see that the thumbnail definition I provided for the vast readership pretty much summarizes the what unites the competing organized crime families of naturalism now raising hundreds of millions of dollars so that they can control the levers of civil power. One false opposite, "the left," has an agenda of statism. The other false opposite, the "right," is committed to appealing to whichever constituency will get its candidates elected, which means that policy positions are like so much "sands through an hour glass."

Do not get lost in the "trees" of the hysteria of the moment. Keep focused on the fact that we are simply witnessing the perfect of the inherent degeneracy of the founding principles:

Behold Midget Mitt Panic Before Your Very Eyes As He Resorts To His Flip-Flopping Ways

One of the reasons that I still believe Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero, our reigning caesar, is going to win enough electoral votes on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, to be re-elected to a second term as President of the United States of America when the electors elected fifty-six days from now cast their ballots in their respective state capitals on Monday, December 17, 2012, is that his opponent, Willard Mitt Romney, believes in nothing that cannot be "modified" to accommodate prevailing trends. This means that Romney has a great future ahead of him in the counterfeit church of conciliarism if he ever converts, something that, given his family's long history in that false religion and the fact that he himself had a "mission" in France in 1966 to take Catholics out of the true Church.

Remember, Willard Mitt Romney ran for the United States Senate in 1994 against United States Senator Edward Moore Kennedy (see Another Victim of Americanism; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Behold The Free Rein Given to Error; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Unfortunate Enough to Be A Baby; Beacon of Social Justice?; Spotlight On The Ordinary; What's Good For Teddy Is Good For Benny; Sean O'Malley: Coward and Hypocrite: More Rationalizations and Distortions) and then for Governor of the the Commonwealth of Massachusetts eight years later against Shannon O'Brien.

Indeed, Kerry Healey, who is completely and unapologetically pro-abortion, spoke on Thursday, August 30, 2012, at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida (the night after the pro-abortion Condoleeza Rice spoke), in behalf of the man whom he served as lieutenant governor for four years the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Willard Mitt Romney. She was not disqualified from speaking because, of course, Romney, who believes that abortion is a "divisive" issue about which we can disagree.

As is well-known, Willard Mitt Romney flipped-flop on the chemical and and surgical assassination of children when running for the 2008 Republican Party presidential nomination, claiming that he was "pro-life" while supporting the direct, intentional execution of innocent children in certain supposedly "hard" cases (to which he added another such case, "the health of the mother, see Herods To The Naturalist Right, Herods To The Naturalist Left), a position he says he maintains to this day.

Is this the reality, however.

Of course not.

Look at the extent to which Willard Mitt Romney went to demonize United States Representative Todd Akin (R-Missouri) last month, virtually reading him out of the Republican Party (see Blood Money Talks Loud And Clear, Blood Money Talks Loud And Clear, part two, Blood Money Talks Loud and Clear, part three, Only So Much Tolerance In The Republican Big Tent, Herods To The Naturalist Right, Herods To The Naturalist Left and Remaining Unapologetic In Support Of Evil). 

Look at how Willard Mitt Romney orchestrated the systematic muting of the issue of baby-killing during prime-time coverage of the Republican National Convention and how he himself reduced mention of the daily slaughter of the preborn to but one-line near the end of his acceptance address on Thursday, August 30, 2012) ("I will protect the sanctity of life"), thus having fed a few miserly crumbs to the fools who keep believing that they are going to "make progress" in retarding social evils if such devils as Romney who do not have tails defeat such devils as Obama with them. (For past articles on this foolishness, see We Have Learned Nothing, 2004, We Continue to Learn Nothing, 2004, We Don't Want to Learn Anything, Bob Dole, part trois, Pinning The Tail On The Next Bob Dole and Bob Dole's Many Faces .)

Romney also pledged to "defend marriage" in the same sentence in which he promised twelve days ago to "protect" the sanctity of life. Yet it was a little over two months beforehand that Romney had gone "off message" on "gay marriage," causing his campaign to go into full damage control and spin doctoring. Here is what Romney said in May on Your World with Neil Cavuto, followed by his campaign's effort to do damage-control:

Cavuto: “The president in an attack ad that’s already out now governor, maybe in response to and a quick follow up from this decision yesterday that you’ve been all over the map on this issue – that you are against civil unions, you have said that this is a state issue, then you said that maybe it’s the federal government that should handle it through a constitutional amendment protecting marriage between a man and a woman. What is your firm position?”

Romney: “Well, thank you for any confusion that’s there. Let me make it very clear, which is that my preference would be to have a national standard that defines marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman. That would then allow states to determine what rights would be provided for people of the same gender that wanted to have a relationship. There could be domestic partnership benefits, for instance, where one state might decide to provide hospital visitation rights. Another state might decide to provide that as well as benefits of other kinds. States could have their own decisions with regards to the domestic partnership rights. But my preference would be to have a national standard for marriage and that marriage be defined as being between a man and a woman.”

Cavuto: “Gays quickly interpret that governor as being discriminatory to them and that a President Romney would etch in the Constitution something that discriminates against a large swath of people in this country, gays. What do you say?”

Romney: “You know, we as a society take action which we believe strengthens the nation. I happen to believe that the best setting for raising a child is where there’s the opportunity for a mom and a dad to be in the home. I know there are many circumstances where that’s not possible, through death or divorce. I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children -- that’s fine. But my preference is that we encourage the marriage of a man and a woman. And that we continue to define marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman.”

Cavuto: Some have likened this to, sort of like the civil rights movement all over again. And that gay’s push for rights is very analogous. What do you say?

Romney: I don’t see it in that light. I believe my record as a person who has supported civil rights is strong and powerful.

At the same time, I believe that marriage has been defined the same way for literally thousands of years, by virtually every civilization in history, and that marriage is literally by its definition a relationship between a man and a woman. And if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, and even want to adopt a child in my state -- individuals of the same sex were able to adopt children. In my view, that’s something which people have the right to do. But to call that marriage, is, in my view, a departure from the real meaning of that word. (From Your World With Neil Cavuto, Transcript, Wednesday, May 10, 2012.)

(CBS News) Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Friday backed away from his support of adoptions by same-sex couples, saying that he simply "acknowledges" the legality of such adoptions in many states.

A day earlier, Romney, in an interview with Fox News' Neil Cavuto, had indicated that while he does not support same-sex marriage, he considers the adoption of children by same-sex couples a "right."

He said on Thursday: "And if two people of the same gender want to live together, want to have a loving relationship, or even to adopt a child -- in my state individuals of the same sex were able to adopt children. In my view, that's something that people have a right to do. But to call that marriage is something that in my view is a departure from the real meaning of that word."

But then on Friday, he was asked, in an interview with CBS' WBTV in Charlotte, N.C., how his opposition to same-sex marriage "squared" with his support for gay adoptions. Romney told anchor Paul Cameron, "Well actually I think all states but one allow gay adoption, so that's a position which has been decided by most of the state legislators, including the one in my state some time ago. So I simply acknowledge the fact that gay adoption is legal in all states but one."

Romney did remain consistent on one point: He said he does not intend to use President Obama's flip flop of same-sex marriage against him in the campaign. Obama, who opposed same-sex marriage when he ran for president in 2008, said this week he now supports it. Romney said, "I think the issue of marriage and gay marriage is a very tender and sensitive topic. People come out in different places on this. The president has changed course in regards to this topic. I think that's his right to do that. I have a different view than he does. I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman, but I just don't think that this becomes a hot political issue dividing our nation." (Romney backs away from same-gender adoptions.)

Willard Mitt Romney is acting as a politician without convictions. He just wants to get elected. Period. He is afraid of "offending" moderate voters who might be "alienated" in swing states, something that will be be elaborated upon in the next section of this article.

"But wait!", someone out there in cyberspace might object. "Willard Mitt Romney wants to repeal ObamaCare. He's said so. See, Droleskey, here's the video: Romney: 'I Will Repeal ObamaCare'."

All right. Let me answer this objection from the hysteria of cyberspace.

Let's try to sort through this.

The man who gave us the very prototype for ObamaCare, RomneyCare, is going to repeal ObamaCare?

The man who made not one mention of ObamaCare in his presidential nomination acceptance address is going to repeal ObamaCare?

The man who said just two days ago that he wants to "replace" certain parts of ObamaCare so that he can "keep" those parts that, just coincidentally, you understand, polls show the public likes? That man? Willard Mitt Romney?

Here's my proof to those of who wrapped up in the hysteria of this utter farce that, as I noted in the immediate aftermath of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the combined cases of National Federation of Independent Business, et al. v. Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Heath and Human Services, et al. and Department of Health and Human Services, et al. v. Florida, et al. , June 28, 2012, ObamaCare is really, really, really, really, really here to stay:

DAVID GREGORY: But will you cut a deal? Will you compromise, even if it risks a conservative revolt?

MITT ROMNEY: There's nothing wrong with the term compromise, but there is something very wrong with the term abandoning one's principles. And I'm going to stand by my principles. And those are I am not going to raise taxes on the American people. Our problem in our country is not that we're not paying enough taxes. It's that we're spending too much money and the economy is not growing as it could and should.

MITT ROMNEY: We're going to replace Obamacare. And I'm replacing it with my own plan. And even in Massachusetts when I was governor, our plan there deals with pre-existing conditions and with young people.

DAVID GREGORY: So you'd keep that part of the federal plan?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, I'm not getting rid of all of healthcare reform. Of course there are a number of things that I like in healthcare reform that I'm going to put in place. One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage. Two is to assure that the marketplace allows for individuals to have policies that cover their family up to whatever age they might like. I also want individuals to be able to buy insurance, health insurance, on their own as opposed to only being able to get it on a tax advantage basis through their company.

The Romney campaign is now in full damage-control mode as a result of this statement.

Defenders of Midget Mitt in the Wall Street Journal have said that the Republican Party did not clearly state what he actually believed about the ObamaCare provisions he mentioned.

A columnist of one sort or another at the National Review Online was able to secure the following kind of "clarification" yesterday from a Romney aide:

In reference to pre-existing conditions, a Romney aide responds, “Governor Romney will ensure that discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage is prohibited,” and refers me to these remarks Romney made in Florida in June:

I also want to make sure that people can’t get dropped if they have a preexisting condition. . . . So let’s say someone has been continuously insured and they develop a serious condition and let’s say they lose their job or they change jobs, they move and they go to a new place. I don’t want them to be denied insurance because they’ve got some preexisting condition. So we’re going to have to make sure that the law we replace Obamacare with assures that people who have a preexisting condition, who’ve been insured in the past are able to get insurance in the future so they don’t have to worry about that condition keeping them from getting the kind of health care they deserve. ( Romney and Obamacare.)


As I pointed out in Here To Stay on June 29, 2012, ObamaCare will never be repealed, no, not even if Republicans control both Houses of the Congress of the United States of America and there is a President Willard Mitt Romney and Vice President Paul Davis Ryan. Why? Because Republicans will not have a veto-proof majority and the slime ball from Nevada by the name of Harry Reid, Romney's fellow Mormon, by the way, will never permit any repeal vote on ObamaCare to come to the floor of the United States Senate. ObamaCare is here to stay.

Even if a "President" Romney is able to get such a "repeal and place" program passed by the use of the same process of reconciliation that was used to pass the Trojan Horse of socialism entitled the Affordable Health Care and Patient Protection Act in the first place thirty months ago, there is yet another slight problem: government has no business whatsoever in the management of health care. End of discussion.

Speaking on the purely natural level, Willard Mitt Romney is so afraid of offending "independent" voters, many of whom are opposed to ObamaCare, that he is unwilling to make the case against the nationalization of the health care industry because he knows that he will be attacked by Team Obama for being a hypocrite on the issue. After all, RomneyCare was the prototype for ObamaCare. If Willard Mitt Romney is so opposed to ObamaCare, why does not he see it as his duty to convince voters that it is a monstrosity? The answer to this is that Romney is not truly opposed to ObamaCare and "independent" voters sense that this must be so as he is not telling them why the Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act should be repealed (see Is Romney Letting ObamaCare Off the Hook?).

Why should voters vote for Obama Lite when can have the real deal? And, that you, see is why Republicans such as Willard Mitt Romney, men who are unsure of what they believe and/or are incapable of stating their beliefs without "threatening" "independent" or "swing" voters, invariably lose to men such as Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero who do have a certain core set of beliefs and are able to articulate them well enough to pander to the emotions of the masses.

I  have used the quotation immediately below before. I will do again as the late Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, though discussing the struggle between East and West in the Cold War, provided a brilliant manner of explaining why those of the naturalist "left" prevail over the course of time over their false opposite number:

As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation at first by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say in 1844 that "communism is naturalized humanism."

This statement turned out not to be entirely senseless. One does see the same stones in the foundations of a despiritualized humanism and of any type of socialism: endless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility, which under communist regimes reach the stage of anti-religious dictatorship; concentration on social structures with a seemingly scientific approach. (This is typical of the Enlightenment in the Eighteenth Century and of Marxism). Not by coincidence all of communism's meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.

The interrelationship is such, too, that the current of materialism which is most to the left always ends up by being stronger, more attractive and victorious, because it is more consistent. Humanism without its Christian heritage cannot resist such competition. We watch this process in the past centuries and especially in the past decades, on a world scale as the situation becomes increasingly dramatic. Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism and socialism could never resist communism. The communist regime in the East could stand and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who felt a kinship and refused to see communism's crimes. When they no longer could do so, they tried to justify them. In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East. (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart. June 8, 1978.)

This explains why men such as Willard Mitt Romney are ready fodder for men such as Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero. The demographics in this nation have changed to such an extent that Obama knows that his organized crime family of the false opposite of the "left" can tout openly pro-abortion, pro-perversity, pro-contraception speakers without suffering at the polls as a result. The "left" has won the heart and soul of just enough voters in this country so as to make sure that its agenda of our total enslavement by the anti-Incarnational monster civil state of modernity is as tight as it can be and, in practical, human terms, entirely irreversible.

Changing Demographics Changes Political Discourse in a System of Naturalism

Step By Step Yet Again noted four months ago that presidential elections are decided today in only a number of key "swing" states. If readers want empirical verification of this fact, they can to a very useful research source, Historical Presidential Election Information by State, where you can review the presidential voting history of each state.

Take a look, for example, at a state such as Rhode Island, where Catholics constitute the largest percentage of state population in the nation, which has voted for a Republican Presidential candidate precisely twice in the past thirty-eight years, going for incumbent President Richard Milhous Nixon in his 1972 landslide re-election and going the same for incumbent President Ronald Wilson Reagan in his own 1984 landslide re-election. Rhode Island has voted consistently for the Democratic Party's presidential nominee since the election of 1928 when New York Governor Alfred Emanuel Smith was running against United States Secretary of Commerce Herbert Clark Hoover. Apart from 1972 and 1984, the only two times that Rhode Island has gone "red" since 1928 were in 1952 and 1956 when the Republican Party nominee was Dwight David Eisenhower. Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero won sixty-three percent of the vote in Rhode Island four years ago. Anyone who thinks it will be different this year has caught a very bad case of naturalist election hysteria fever.

Similarly, other northeastern states (New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Connecticut and Vermont) have voted for the Democratic Party's presidential nominee very consistently in the past forty years with the exception of the Nixon and Reagan landslide re-elections. Anyone who thinks he is helping to "get rid" of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero in these states is suffering from that same kind of naturalistic election hysteria fever.

The same is true in every state that is solidly "blue" in presidential elections (California, Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota) and those states that have been solidly "red" in presidential elections in recent decades (Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Utah, Kansas, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky and one state that is solidly "red" this year, West Virginia). One is not going to see a dime of campaign cash being spent by either the Obama or Romney campaigns in these states, admitting that the changing demographics in the State of Texas might place it in "play" in the future and could produce a smaller margin of victory for Romney this year than that realized by previous Republican candidates dating back to Ronald Wilson Reagan in 1980. (Indiana went for Obama in 2008, although it appears likely to vote for Romney this year. There will be a bit of campaign cash being spent in certain parts of the Hoosier State, where Obama's forces will undertake a heavy get-out-the-vote effort in cities such as Gary and Indianapolis with large concentrations of black and Spanish-speaking voters.)

The farce of naturalism that is taking place at this time will be decided in ten "swing" states. That is where the candidates and the campaign cash are going. With Pennsylvania, which was a potential pick-up for Romney as a result of the horrific state of the economy, now solidly in the Obama camp again, the nine remaining "swing" states where the election will be decided are New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, New Mexico, Colorado, Wisconsin, Missouri, Michigan and, of course, Ohio. To be more specific, you see, the two presidential campaigns are going to concentrate their efforts in selected precincts of targeted counties within those swing states as the state of polling and data-gathering has advanced to such an extent as to permit operatives of the two campaigns to identify micro-levels within counties and cities that can be mined for votes. There are very few undecided voters to be had at this point. The campaign is being waged now at very highly targeted areas as never before.

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll indicates that eighty-six percent of those expressing support for Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero will definitely vote for the statist of the false opposite of the naturalist "left" who is in power at this time and that eighty-five percent of those expressing support for Willard Mitt Romney will do so definitely. With the poll indicating that the Marxist leads the Mormon by a single percentage point insofar as the national vote is concerned, there are indeed very few votes left up for grabs in the next fifty-six days. Very few.

Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero and the handlers behind his TelePrompTer know this very well. They do not care by how much they win the election this year and they are professional enough in their work of Alinksy-style bare-knuckles "community organizing" to know that the election outcome will be very close, although they remain confident enough in their plans, which were unfolded last week at the Democratic National Convention, to believe that they will prevail no matter the state of the economy, being buoyed by the fact that their Manchurian Candidate is doing very well at this time in Ohio and Michigan and Florida.

The calculation made by "Team Obama" is based largely on a far superior grasp of national demographics that have been changed as a result of immigration, contraception and abortion. The Obama campaign operatives believe that the election is theirs if they can secure eighty percent of the non-white vote, a percentage of the population that is growing, and win at least forty percent of the white vote (see Obama Needs 80% of Minority Vote to Win).

As I have noted in the past, ladies and gentlemen, the electorate has changed dramatically since the election of Ronald Wilson Reagan on November 4, 1980. Many of the people who voted for Ronald Reagan thirty-two years ago are dead. The demographics of the country have changed dramatically since then. Various social evils have become more institutionalized and more widely accepted, something that has emboldened the likes of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero and his handlers in the organized crime family of the naturalist "left" and intimidated the likes of Willard Mitt Romney and his own cast of characters of technocrats who just want to figure out a "way" to win. Obama and his people feel free to tout pro-aborts and those engaged in perversity, considering it to his electoral advantage to do so. Romney and his "team" believe that "social issues" such as the chemical and surgical assassination of children and special "rights," including "marriage," for those engaged in perverse acts against nature to be not only irrelevant to electoral politics but a positive liability even to mention except in the most guarded ways, although such matters may be mentioned a bit more directly in front of friendly Catholic or evangelical and fundamentalist Protestant groups.

This change is reflected by the fact that fifty percent of respondents in the Washington Post-ABC News poll said that Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero would a "better job dealing with social issues such as abortion and gay marriage" than Willard Mitt Romney, who was chosen by thirty-nine percent in the poll as doing the "better job."

Apostasy does have consequences, ladies and gentleman, and it is precisely because the lords of conciliarism have refused to penalize Catholics in public life who promote with impunity the very evils that have become more and more institutionalized and accept in recent decades that most Catholics, no matter where they fall across the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide in this time of apostasy and betrayal, just kind of shrug their shoulders when there is mention of "divisive issues" in the farce of naturalism that is taking place at the present time. Most Catholics, not unlike most other Americans, are obsessed about "the money, the money, the money" without realizing that God will never permit a land where there is such needless division on matters of moral truth contained in the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law to realize material prosperity over the long term.

Apostasy does have consequences.

Emboldened to Pursue Evil Openly and Without Fear of Contradiction or Rebuke

The devil and his agents of naturalism have been emboldened by the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism to trumpet openly and without fear of contradiction or rebuke evils that offend God and injurious to the temporal and eternal welfare of men and the right ordering of their nations.

Such boldness was on full display in the Democratic National Convention last week in Charlotte, North Carolina, as one openly pro-abortion, pro-contraception, pro-perversity speaker after another addressed the delegates assembled there  to make appeals to "protect" nonexistent "rights" that are said to be "threatened" if the false opposites of the naturalist "right" get elected. The very fact that the Republicans have done nothing when in office to retard the spread of these evils and that Willard Mitt Romney has said that "contraception is working well" or that he permitted himself four months ago to state that he believed the "gay couples" should have the right to adopt children means nothing to those on the "left" who must make it appear as though Romney is actually a "threat" to the evils they cherish even though he is nothing of the sort.

What can one say when the organized crime family of the naturalist "left" features such speakers as Sandra Fluke (see More Than Just A Fluke)? Really, what can be said when such a person speaks and command the respect and adulation of the people she is addressing?

What can one say when pro-abortion, pro-perversity Catholics John F. Kerry and Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., boast of the the killing of Osama bin Laden even though they support the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn under cover of the civil law.

I have this to say to John F. Kerry: You asked if Osama bin Laden was better off now than he was four years ago. Interesting. Ask the ten million innocent babies who have been slaughtered by surgical means in this country since Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero took office on January 20, 2012, if they are better off now? Indeed, Senator Kerry, the country is worse off now than it was because of their slaughter.

I have this to say to the penultimate plagiarist and demagogue, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr: Hey, pal, it's been thirty-two and one-half years since I asked you in person a variation of the following. Let me do so again in light of your boasting that "Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive." How do you think things are going to look for you at your Particular Judgment when you continue to scoff at these words written by Pope Pius XI eighty-two years ago:


Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)

What about Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus himself?

Well, his own acceptance acceptance, full of every statist canard and misrepresentation of history imaginable, last week was designed to excite his political base and to appeal to "independents," many of whom, amazingly enough, "like" him and do not blame him at all for the profligate spending that has brought the national debt of the United States of America up to sixteen trillion dollars and has seen American taxpayer monies used to pay off Obama supporters in the name of a "domestic stimulus" package.

Such must be the fate of men and their nations who seek to appeal to everything except Christ the King. We are being chastised for our refusal to champion the cause of Our King as we have believed in one myth of naturalism after another without ever learning anything from the past and as we accept greater and greater doses of the so-called "lesser evil" in order to rid ourselves of supposedly "greater evils" who come to power after the failure of the "lesser evils" to "better" the country.

Apostasy and Sin Have Consequences

No nation whose citizens are engaged in the wanton commission of sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance and whose laws and popular culture institutionalize and promote such sins is going to know social order. Sin is a deadly serious matter. It has profound consequences for men and their nations. No one can say that he loves Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who became Incarnate in His Most Blessed Mother's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the Annunciation if he is determined to persist in his own personal sins, no less to protect them under cover of the civil law and/or to promote them in every aspect of popular culture.

The horror of man's rebellion against God represented by Original Sin and our own Actual Sins is what is responsible for imposing the most unspeakable suffering on the God-Man in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and it is what is responsible for imposing thrusting those Seven Swords of Sorrow through and through Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Let me reiterate the point made just above in a slightly different way: no one can have any true understanding of Who Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is and what He suffered in order to redeem us on the wood of the Holy Cross if he minimizes the horror of his own personal sins and/or is indifferent to the promotion of personal sin under cover of civil law and in every aspect of popular culture.

Every problem in the world is caused by the sins of men. The entirety of social order is dependent upon order in the souls of men. And order within the souls of men is entirely dependent upon their being in states of Sanctifying Grace. Many men who have never known--or who have forgotten--the simple fact that they are fallen creatures whose disordered natures incline them to sin and that they are in need of reforming their lives on a constant basis in cooperation with Sanctifying Grace will spend their entire lives attempting to "discover" why human beings do evil things and how human behavior can be "reformed" by purely naturalistic means. Other men who have never known--or who have forgotten--the simple fact that they are fallen creatures whose disordered natures incline them to sin will live in sin without a clue or a care as to how they are offending the true God and how they are wounding their own immortal souls, made in the image and likeness of the Most Blessed Trinity and redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross.

Social violence must abound in a world that is suffering the after-effects of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry. True, the vestigial after-effects of Original Sin and the effects of the Actual Sins of men caused many problems during the era of Christendom, something that both Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII noted in their respective first encyclical letter. It is also true, however, that the men of the Middle Ages knew that their sins were responsible for each and every problem, personal and social, in the world. Most men today have no such knowledge:



When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922):

The Holy Gospel narrates that when Jesus was crucified "there was darkness over the whole earth" (Matthew xxvii. 45); a terrifying symbol of what happened and what still happens spiritually wherever incredulity, blind and proud of itself, has succeeded in excluding Christ from modern life, especially from public life, and has undermined faith in God as well as faith in Christ. The consequence is that the moral values by which in other times public and private conduct was gauged have fallen into disuse; and the much vaunted civilization of society, which has made ever more rapid progress, withdrawing man, the family and the State from the beneficent and regenerating effects of the idea of God and the teaching of the Church, has caused to reappear, in regions in which for many centuries shone the splendors of Christian civilization, in a manner ever clearer, ever more distinct, ever more distressing, the signs of a corrupt and corrupting paganism: "There was darkness when they crucified Jesus" (Roman Breviary, Good Friday, Response Five).

Many perhaps, while abandoning the teaching of Christ, were not fully conscious of being led astray by a mirage of glittering phrases, which proclaimed such estrangement as an escape from the slavery in which they were before held; nor did they then foresee the bitter consequences of bartering the truth that sets free, for error which enslaves. They did not realize that, in renouncing the infinitely wise and paternal laws of God, and the unifying and elevating doctrines of Christ's love, they were resigning themselves to the whim of a poor, fickle human wisdom; they spoke of progress, when they were going back; of being raised, when they groveled; of arriving at man's estate, when they stooped to servility. They did not perceive the inability of all human effort to replace the law of Christ by anything equal to it; "they became vain in their thoughts" (Romans i. 21).

With the weakening of faith in God and in Jesus Christ, and the darkening in men's minds of the light of moral principles, there disappeared the indispensable foundation of the stability and quiet of that internal and external, private and public order, which alone can support and safeguard the prosperity of States.

It is true that even when Europe had a cohesion of brotherhood through identical ideals gathered from Christian preaching, she was not free from divisions, convulsions and wars which laid her waste; but perhaps they never felt the intense pessimism of today as to the possibility of settling them, for they had then an effective moral sense of the just and of the unjust, of the lawful and of the unlawful, which, by restraining outbreaks of passion, left the way open to an honorable settlement. In Our days, on the contrary, dissensions come not only from the surge of rebellious passion, but also from a deep spiritual crisis which has overthrown the sound principles of private and public morality. (Pope Pius XII, Summi Pontificatus, October 10, 1939.)

Most men today are so steeped the irrationality and illogic of Protestanatism and naturalism that they do not have a whit of understanding concerning the wrath of God that is aroused by the public promotion of the each of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance (willful murder, the sin of Sodom, defrauding widows, withholding the day laborer's wages), actually paying money to participate in these sins in many instances and to watch with approval as they are glorified on television and in motion pictures and in magazines. There is almost no appreciation of how human sins have wounded Our Lord once in time and have wound the world in which we live today.

Most men today, including most, although not all, Catholics attached as of yet to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, are concerned primarily, if not exclusively, about material well-being and sensual pleasures, oblivious to their responsibilities to live in accord with the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. They are also oblivious to the patrimony of the Catholic Faith about the disordered nature of materialism as summarized by Pope Leo XIII in Exeunte Iam Anno, December 25, 1888:



Now the whole essence of a Christian life is to reject the corruption of the world and to oppose constantly any indulgence in it; this is taught in the words and deeds, the laws and institutions, the life and death of Jesus Christ, "the author and finisher of faith." Hence, however strongly We are deterred by the evil disposition of nature and character, it is our duty to run to the "fight proposed to Us," fortified and armed with the same desire and the same arms as He who, "having joy set before him, endured the cross." Wherefore let men understand this specially, that it is most contrary to Christian duty to follow, in worldly fashion, pleasures of every kind, to be afraid of the hardships attending a virtuous life, and to deny nothing to self that soothes and delights the senses. "They that are Christ's, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences" -- so that it follows that they who are not accustomed to suffering, and who hold not ease and pleasure in contempt belong not to Christ. By the infinite goodness of God man lived again to the hope of an immortal life, from which he had been cut off, but he cannot attain to it if he strives not to walk in the very footsteps of Christ and conform his mind to Christ's by the meditation of Christ's example. Therefore this is not a counsel but a duty, and it is the duty, not of those only who desire a more perfect life, but clearly of every man "always bearing about in our body the mortification of Jesus." How otherwise could the natural law, commanding man to live virtuously, be kept? For by holy baptism the sin which we contracted at birth is destroyed, but the evil and tortuous roots of sin, which sin has engrafted, and by no means removed. This part of man which is without reason -- although it cannot beat those who fight manfully by Christ's grace -- nevertheless struggles with reason for supremacy, clouds the whole soul and tyrannically bends the will from virtue with such power that we cannot escape vice or do our duty except by a daily struggle. "This holy synod teaches that in the baptized there remains concupiscence or an inclination to evil, which, being left to be fought against, cannot hurt those who do not consent to it, and manfully fight against it by the grace of Jesus Christ; for he is not crowned who does not strive lawfully." There is in this struggle a degree of strength to which only a very perfect virtue, belonging to those who, by putting to flight evil passions, has gained so high a place as to seem almost to live a heavenly life on earth. Granted; grant that few attain such excellence; even the philosophy of the ancients taught that every man should restrain his evil desires, and still more and with greater care those who from daily contact with the world have the greater temptations -- unless it be foolishly thought that where the danger is greater watchfulness is less needed, or that they who are more grievously ill need fewer medicines.

But the toil which is borne in this conflict is compensated by great blessings, beyond and above heavenly and eternal rewards, particularly in this way, that by calming the passions nature is largely restored to its pristine dignity. For man has been born under this law, that the mind should rule the body, that the appetites should be restrained by sound sense and reason; and hence it follows that putting a curb upon our masterful passions is the noblest and greatest freedom. Moreover, in the present state of society it is difficult to see what man could be expected to do without such a disposition. Will he be inclined to do well who has been accustomed to guide his actions by self-love alone? No man can be high-souled, kind, merciful, or restrained, who has not learnt selfconquest and a contempt for this world when opposed to virtue. And yet it must be said that it seems to have been pre-determined by the counsel of God that there should be no salvation to men without strife and pain. Truly, though God has given to man pardon for sin, He gave it under the condition that His only begotten Son should pay the due penalty; and although Jesus Christ might have satisfied divine justice in other ways, nevertheless He preferred to satisfy by the utmost suffering and the sacrifice of His life. Thus he has imposed upon His followers this law, signed in His blood, that their life should be an endless strife with the vices of the age. What made the apostles invincible in their mission of teaching truth to the world; what strengthened the martyrs innumerable in their bloody testimony to the Christian faith, but the readiness of their soul to obey fearlessly His laws? And all who have taken heed to live a Christian life and seek virtue have trodden the same path; therefore We must walk in this way if We desire either Our own salvation or that of others. Thus it becomes necessary for every one to guard manfully against the allurements of luxury, and since on every side there is so much ostentation in the enjoyment of wealth, the soul must be fortified against the dangerous snares of riches lest straining after what are called the good things of life, which cannot satisfy and soon fade away, the soul should lose "the treasure in heaven which faileth not." Finally, this is matter of deep grief, that free-thought and evil example have so evil an influence in enervating the soul, that many are now almost ashamed of the name of Christian -- a shame which is the sign either of abandoned wickedness or the extreme of cowardice; each detestable and each of the highest injury to man. For what salvation remains for such men, or on what hope can they rely, if they cease to glory in the name of Jesus Christ, if they openly and constantly refuse to mold their lives on the precepts of the gospel? It is the common complaint that the age is barren of brave men. Bring back a Christian code of life, and thereby the minds of men will regain their firmness and constancy. But man's power by itself is not equal to the responsibility of so many duties. As We must ask God for daily bread for the sustenance of the body, so must We pray to Him for strength of soul for its nourishment in virtue. Hence that universal condition and law of life, which We have said is a perpetual battle, brings with it the necessity of prayer to God. For, as is well and wisely said by St. Augustine, pious prayer flies over the world's barriers and calls down the mercy of God from heaven. In order to conquer the emotions of lust, and the snares of the devil, lest we should be led into evil, we are commanded to seek the divine help in these words, "pray that ye enter not into temptation." How much more is this necessary, if we wish to labor for the salvation of others? Christ our Lord, the only begotten Son of God, the source of all grace and virtue, first showed by example what he taught in word: "He passed the whole night in the prayer of God," and when nigh to the sacrifice of his life, "He prayed the longer." (Pope Leo XIII, Exeunte Iam Anno, December 25, 1888.)


Naturalism is designed by the devil to convince fallen man that he can, without submitting himself to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for Its infallible explication and eternal safekeeping and without having belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace, change "things" for the "better." Some naturalists even invoke the name of "God," doing so generically. Some invoke the very Holy Name of Jesus Christ in various allocutions and speeches. No one, however, truly knows Who God is unless he accepts what He has revealed about Himself through the Catholic Church. No one knows Our Lord or His teaching truly unless he is a believing Catholic. No one can aspire to true change, that within his immortal soul, without the supernatural helps provided by the Catholic Church.

You want to believe otherwise and act accordingly? Go right ahead. I refuse to spin my wheels on lost causes and movements that are dead ends precisely because they are naturalistic traps from the devil and lead nations into chaos and souls into Hell for all eternity. I, a terrible sinner in need of making much reparation before I die to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for my many sins, will continue to attempt to help the very few people who read this site to view the world and everything that happens in it through the eyes of the true Faith as I exhort these readers to have nothing at all to do with the counterfeit church of conciliarism, whose "reconciliation" with the false principles of Modernity has confused souls and thus consigned nations into an abyss of woe.

Our refuge in this time of chastisement, which is so very similar to that which befell France one hundred years after the refusal of King Louis XIV and the French bishops to consecrated the entirety of France to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus according to the express command of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as He made it manifest to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, must be our total consecration to Our Lord through His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. We need our Blessed Mother's help. Only she can help us, and to this end we need to organize more and more public Rosary processions in honor of her Fatima Message and to make reparation for our own sins and those of our nation as we pray for the conversion of the nation

We Must Follow the Path of Our Lady of Fatima

All things are possible in the farce of naturalism that is upon us. The three presidential debates and the one vice presidential debate next month could change the dynamics of the general election as much as they did during the Republican primary/caucus cycle earlier this year, although it should be noted that Romney only won the Republican nomination because "conservatives" split their votes between Newton Leroy Gingrich, who was eviscerated by the Romney campaign machine with a deluge of negative advertising, and Richard John Santorum, who suffered much of the same fate. As wrong as they are on a number of key issues, Gingrich and Santorum were entirely correct earlier this year when they stated that Romney would be incapable of using ObamaCare, the very thing that helped to propel Republicans back to a majority in the United States House of Representatives two years ago, against Obama.

Yes, Willard Mitt Romney could still wind up defeating Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero and then give the country a variation of the liberalism he used to govern the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. After all, those who play it safe to win will "play it safe" to govern in order to win again. Such must ever be the fate of those who believe in the delusions of naturalism.

If Romney does win, however, it will be despite his inept campaign, something that secular commentator Charles Cook noted yesterday:

It is becoming clear that if President Obama is reelected, it will be despite the economy and because of his campaign; if Mitt Romney wins, it will be because of the economy and despite his campaign. (Romney Adrift.)


Men who believe in nothing and are incapable of articulating coherently when answered questions about what they believe are incapable of standing up to those who believe in all of the wrong things. Barack Hussein Obama is indeed a naturalist. He is better at promoting his brand of naturalism than Willard Mitt Romney is at even explaining what his own policies happen to be. Generalities and contradictions will not defeat our self-confident Hugo Chavez of the North who is in the White House at this time.

As I noted in a article written on May 28, 2001, the country is not with the cause of Christ the King. And when a country is not with the cause of Christ the King it must be in the grips of the devils of naturalism, whether the have their tails exposed for all to see or try to hide them under a cloak of "moderation."

The way out of this mess runs through Our Lady's Fatima Message that has been deconstructed by the conciliar revolutionaries, starting with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who has even gone so far as to deny that an actual physical apparition of Our Lady took place in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, in 1917 (see Theological Commentary on the Fatima Message that is explained in my own On Full Display: The Modernist Mind). It runs through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, something that Our Lady explained ninety-five ago as she revealed the Second Secret of Fatima to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos:

"I want you to come here on the 13th of next month, [August] to continue to pray the Rosary every day in honour of Our Lady of the Rosary, in order to obtain peace for the world and the end of the war, because only she can help you."

"Continue to come here every month. In October, I will tell you who I am and what I want, and I will perform a miracle for all to see and believe."

Lucia made some requests for sick people, to which Mary replied that she would cure some but not others, and that all must say the rosary to obtain such graces, before continuing: "Sacrifice yourselves for sinners, and say many times, especially when you make some sacrifice: O Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary."

"You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end; but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the pontificate of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father.

"To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world."

Mary specifically told Lucia not to tell anyone about the secret at this stage, apart from Francisco, before continuing: "When you pray the Rosary, say after each mystery: 'O my Jesus, forgive us, save us from the fire of hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those who are most in need.' "

Lucia asked if there was anything more, and after assuring her that there was nothing more, Mary disappeared off into the distance. Mary's words at Fatima

Our Lady promised on July 13 1917, to return to request the consecration of Russia by the Holy Father. She came to visit Sister Lucia in Tuy, Spain, on June 13, 1929, to specify the terms of this consecration:

"The moment has come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the Bishops in the world, to make the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. There are so many souls whom the Justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I have come to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray." (Mary's words at Fatima.)


As I have noted on this site before, some will protest that the Church never passed on the June 13, 1929, apparition of Our Lady to Sister Lucia in Tuy, Spain, believing that the terms of the proper consecration of Russia were spelled out in the July 13, 1917 apparition, which terms were fulfilled, they believe, when Pope Pius XII singly consecrated Russia to Our Lady's Immaculate Heart in 1952. Others, however, believe, as I do, that Our Lady came in 1929 to make the specific request for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart by a pope with all of the world's bishops. As was pointed out in Our Lady Does Not Act on Her Own nearly four years ago now, the Church never ruled on Our Lady's December 10, 1925, apparition to Sister Lucia dos Santos wherein she specified the practice of the Five First Saturdays to be kept in reparation for sins against her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart:

Have compassion on the heart of your most holy Mother, covered with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment, and there is no one to make an act of reparation. Look, my daughter, at my heart, surrounded with thorns with which ungrateful men pierce it at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You at least try to console me and say that I promise to assist at the hour of death, with the graces necessary for salvation, all those who, on the first Saturday of five consecutive months, shall confess, receive Holy Communion, recite five decades of the Rosary, and keep me company for fifteen minutes while meditating on fifteen mysteries of the Rosary, with the intention of making reparation to me." (Mary's words at Fatima.)

The Church has given, at least in a de facto sense, recognition to this private apparition made in 1925, making it plausible, at the very least, that the 1929 apparition of Our Lady to Sister Lucia in the convent at Tuy, Spain, in which Our Lady called for the collegial consecration of Russia by a pope with all of the world's bishops to be an elaboration on that same July 13, 1917, message in the Cova da Iria in which she first called for the Communions of reparation on the First Saturdays and called for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart by the pope.

Although even some who accept the legitimacy of the 1929 apparition contend that the time for such a collegial consecration has passed, noting correctly that World War II could have been prevented by such a collegial consecration, Sister Lucia continued to insist that the collegial consecration needed to be done. With all due respect to those who do not accept these conclusions, I would like to submit that the state of the world-at-large and that of the Church Militant on earth during this time of apostasy and betrayal is a direct chastisement for the fact that Popes Pius XI and XII were advised badly to refrain from consecrating Russia collegially with all of the world's bishops to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

We must, therefore, bear the cross with joy and gratitude in this time of chastisement, recognizing that the errors of Modernity in the world and those of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism are intertwined with each other as but similar manifestations of the errors of Russia (see Conversion of Russia Update). 

We have much to suffer for our own sins. We must suffer well as we place not our trust in the princes of naturalism in this world or the princes of false "reconciliation" and "dialogue" with false religions in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. We must place our trust in the Immaculate Heart of Mary as we give this heart, out which the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus was formed, all of the sufferings of the present moment so that she can present whatever merit we earn from patiently and lovingly enduring them to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity.

Catholicism is the one and only foundation of social order. You have heard this before? You will keep hearing until the day I die or the day that I am unable to continue work on this site as a result of physical and/or mental infirmity, whichever shall first occur (and I realize that some of you believe that the latter condition obtains at the present time). Catholicism is the only and only foundation of personal and social order. Period. It is Catholicism alone that men and their nations are reconciled to Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary our Queen.

We must, therefore, enfold ourselves into the love of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus as we make reparation for our own many sins, which are so responsible for the worsening of the state of the Church Militant on earth and of the world-at-large, as we seek to restore all things in Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen, praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.

Viva Cristo Rey!


Our Lady of the Rosary, 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.

Saints Protus and Hyacinth, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?


© Copyright 2012, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.