9 Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
November 28, 2009

Ashamed of Christ the King in Life?

He Will Be Ashamed of You in Death

by Thomas A. Droleskey

As I noted about five weeks ago now, writing articles on the Social Reign of Christ the King has not won me many friends. As I have noted on any number of occasions, I was hated long before I came to recognize and accept the teaching of the Catholic Church that those who defect from her Received Teaching cannot hold ecclesiastical office within her ranks legitimately solely because I rejected naturalism in all of its diabolical forms, daring to point out that the men who founded the United States of America believed that they could provide a foundation for social order absent a due subordination to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for Whom many of the founders had a particular hatred and revulsion.

What I wrote five weeks ago is worth repeating once again in light of an incredible display of mockery of the Social Reign of Christ the King that was displayed by a man named Joseph Bottum, the editor of First Things magazine, and the apologist of all things conciliar named George Weigel, whose particular scorn for the Catholic Church's immutable social teaching concerning the obligation that the civil state has to recognize the true religion as its officials pursue the common temporal good in light of man's Last End is a matter of grave scandal to the Sacred Rights of Christ the King, on an interview that was conducted recently on The World Over program of the Eternally Wishful Television Network (EWTN):

It is, of course, not fun to be hated and reviled, even by many in sedevacantist circles, for insisting that Catholicism and Catholicism alone is the sole foundation of personal and social order, and it is definitely not the path to career success or financial security to keep insisting on this truth. However, conscious of my sins and my need to make reparation for them as the consecrated slave of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, I will never cease attempting to convince the very, very few people who read this website of the following truths:

1) Each of the problems of the world is caused by Original Sin and our own Actual Sins.

2) There is no way to remedy any problem in the world except by the reform of individual souls in cooperation with the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross, graces that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

3) Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted the totality of His Deposit of Faith exclusively in the Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

4) Therefore, my friends, although some who are outside the maternal bosom of the Catholic Church may have interesting things to say about the details of this or that manifestation of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry, we do not look to Protestants or Mormons (see How Mormonism Built Glenn Beck and my own Pure, Unadulterated Americanism) or Jews or political ideologues of the false opposites of the naturalist "left" and the naturalist "right" for "explanations" as to why our we have the problems that face us today.

5) The Catholic Church teaches us that the civil state has a positive obligation before God to recognize her as the true religion and to undertake a 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), which Last End the civil state has an obligation to aid:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)


6) Civil constitutions that do not recognize the authority of the Catholic Church to exercise the Social Reign of Christ the King after her hierarchy exhausts her Indirect Power of teaching and preaching and exhortation by interposing herself with officials of the civil government in grave circumstances when the good of souls demands her motherly intervention are defenseless against efforts to deconstruct its own words as statism increases over time. Why should anyone have respect for the words of mere men when the teaching authority instituted by the Divine Redeemer is not even acknowledged as binding upon all men in all nations at all times in all circumstances until the end of time?

7) Human beings are not self-redemptive (which is the essence of the heresy of semi-Pelagianism). We cannot build the 'better" world absent a complete submission to the truths of the Catholic Faith.

8) The devil raises up the false opposites of the naturalistic "left" to make their counterparts in naturalistic "right" seem better by comparison, blinding even believing Catholics to the truth that the naturalists of the "left" and of the "right" are as one in rejecting the necessity of Catholicism as the sole foundation of personal and social order, believing as one that men can build the "better" world on their own powers, indeed, that they can be "good" on their own powers without having belief in access to, or cooperation with Sanctifying Grace.

9) Catholics thus get lost in a sea of problems without ever realizing that there is no naturalistic, interdenominational, nondenominational, philosophical, ideological, legal or constitutional means to retard a single evil. Pope Pius IX and Pope Saint Pius X, among many others, taught us this very clearly that such can never be the case. Do you know better than they did as they reiterated the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church from which no one may dissent legitimately:

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling. (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

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.”


10) No organization founded in naturalistic and/or inter-denominational principles and that eschews public honors given to Christ the King and to Our Lady of the Rosary is worthy of the support of any Catholic at any time for any reason. No Christ the King? No Rosary? No good cause to support, financially or otherwise. This is real, real simple:

From this it may clearly be seen what consequences are to be expected from that false pride which, rejecting our Saviour's Kingship, places man at the summit of all things and declares that human nature must rule supreme. And yet, this supreme rule can neither be attained nor even defined. The rule of Jesus Christ derives its form and its power from Divine Love: a holy and orderly charity is both its foundation and its crown. Its necessary consequences are the strict fulfilment of duty, respect of mutual rights, the estimation of the things of heaven above those of earth, the preference of the love of God to all things. But this supremacy of man, which openly rejects Christ, or at least ignores Him, is entirely founded upon selfishness, knowing neither charity nor selfdevotion. Man may indeed be king, through Jesus Christ: but only on condition that he first of all obey God, and diligently seek his rule of life in God's law. By the law of Christ we mean not only the natural precepts of morality and the Ancient Law, all of which Jesus Christ has perfected and crowned by His declaration, explanation and sanction; but also the rest of His doctrine and His own peculiar institutions. Of these the chief is His Church. Indeed whatsoever things Christ has instituted are most fully contained in His Church. Moreover, He willed to perpetuate the office assigned to Him by His Father by means of the ministry of the Church so gloriously founded by Himself. On the one hand He confided to her all the means of men's salvation, on the other He most solemnly commanded men to be subject to her and to obey her diligently, and to follow her even as Himself: "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me" (Luke x, 16). Wherefore the law of Christ must be sought in the Church. Christ is man's "Way"; the Church also is his "Way"-Christ of Himself and by His very nature, the Church by His commission and the communication of His power. Hence all who would find salvation apart from the Church, are led astray and strive in vain.

As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at.  (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)

The third evil for which a remedy is needed is one which is chiefly characteristic of the times in which we live. Men in former ages, although they loved the world, and loved it far too well, did not usually aggravate their sinful attachment to the things of earth by a contempt of the things of heaven. Even the right-thinking portion of the pagan world recognized that this life was not a home but a dwelling-place, not our destination, but a stage in the journey. But men of our day, albeit they have had the advantages of Christian instruction, pursue the false goods of this world in such wise that the thought of their true Fatherland of enduring happiness is not only set aside, but, to their shame be it said, banished and entirely erased from their memory, notwithstanding the warning of St. Paul, "We have not here a lasting city, but we seek one which is to come" (Heb. xiii., 4).

When We seek out the causes of this forgetfulness, We are met in the first place by the fact that many allow themselves to believe that the thought of a future life goes in some way to sap the love of our country, and thus militates against the prosperity of the commonwealth. No illusion could be more foolish or hateful. Our future hope is not of a kind which so monopolizes the minds of men as to withdraw their attention from the interests of this life. Christ commands us, it is true, to seek the Kingdom of God, and in the first place, but not in such a manner as to neglect all things else. For, the use of the goods of the present life, and the righteous enjoyment which they furnish, may serve both to strengthen virtue and to reward it. The splendor and beauty of our earthly habitation, by which human society is ennobled, may mirror the splendor and beauty of our dwelling which is above. Therein we see nothing that is not worthy of the reason of man and of the wisdom of God. For the same God who is the Author of Nature is the Author of Grace, and He willed not that one should collide or conflict with the other, but that they should act in friendly alliance, so that under the leadership of both we may the more easily arrive at that immortal happiness for which we mortal men were created.

But men of carnal mind, who love nothing but themselves, allow their thoughts to grovel upon things of earth until they are unable to lift them to that which is higher. For, far from using the goods of time as a help towards securing those which are eternal, they lose sight altogether of the world which is to come, and sink to the lowest depths of degradation. We may doubt if God could inflict upon man a more terrible punishment than to allow him to waste his whole life in the pursuit of earthly pleasures, and in forgetfulness of the happiness which alone lasts for ever.

It is from this danger that they will be happily rescued, who, in the pious practice of the Rosary, are wont, by frequent and fervent prayer, to keep before their minds the glorious mysteries. These mysteries are the means by which in the soul of a Christian a most clear light is shed upon the good things, hidden to sense, but visible to faith, "which God has prepared for those who love Him." From them we learn that death is not an annihilation which ends all things, but merely a migration and passage from life to life. By them we are taught that the path to Heaven lies open to all men, and as we behold Christ ascending thither, we recall the sweet words of His promise, "I go to prepare a place for you." By them we are reminded that a time will come when "God will wipe away every tear from our eyes," and that "neither mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow, shall be any more," and that "We shall be always with the Lord," and "like to the Lord, for we shall see Him as He is," and "drink of the torrent of His delight," as "fellow-citizens of the saints," in the blessed companionship of our glorious Queen and Mother. Dwelling upon such a prospect, our hearts are kindled with desire, and we exclaim, in the words of a great saint, "How vile grows the earth when I look up to heaven!" Then, too, shall we feel the solace of the assurance "that which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory" (2 Cor. iv., 17).

Here alone we discover the true relation between time and eternity, between our life on earth and our life in heaven; and it is thus alone that are formed strong and noble characters. When such characters can be counted in large numbers, the dignity and well-being of society are assured. All that is beautiful, good, and true will flourish in the measure of its conformity to Him who is of all beauty, goodness, and truth the first Principle and the Eternal Source.

These considerations will explain what We have already laid down concerning the fruitful advantages which are to be derived from the use of the Rosary, and the healing power which this devotion possesses for the evils of the age and the fatal sores of society. These advantages, as we may readily conceive, will be secured in a higher and fuller measure by those who band themselves together in the sacred Confraternity of the Rosary, and who are thus more than others united by a special and brotherly bond of devotion to the Most Holy Virgin. In this Confraternity, approved by the Roman Pontiffs, and enriched by them with indulgences and privileges, they possess their own rule and government, hold their meetings at stated times, and are provided with ample means of leading a holy life and of laboring for the good of the community. They are, are so to speak, the battalions who fight the battle of Christ, armed with His Sacred Mysteries, and under the banner and guidance of the Heavenly Queen. How faithfully her intercession is exercised in response to their prayers, processions, and solemnities is written in the whole experience of the Church not less than in the splendor of the victory of Lepanto. (Pope Leo XIII, Laetitiae Sanctae, September 8, 1893.)


11) Let me reiterate the point just made: No Christ the King? No Rosary? No good cause worthy of the support of Catholics, financially or otherwise. It is that simple.


Joseph Bottum and George Weigel, faithful to the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes," reject these truths, meaning that the true popes of the Catholic Church who reiterated the obligation that each state has to recognize the true Church and, to quote Pope Leo XIII in Longiqua Oceani, January 6, 1895, to accord her "the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority" were in error. This is impossible. God the Holy Ghost is immutable. The true popes of the Catholic Church wrote of the absolute obligation of the civil state to recognize her and to aid its citizens in the pursuit of their Last End. Absolute truths or absolute falsehoods do not change. They are as immutable as God Himself, Who is the Author of all truth.

To wit, to hold, as George Weigel did on EWTN (http://www.youtube.com/watch), that the state is "incompetent" to declare Christ as King, is to say that Pope Saint Pius X' s condemnation of the separation of Church and State as "thesis absolutely false" was itself absolutely false.

To wit, to hold, as Joseph Bottum did on EWTN, that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the King of heart but not of nations, no less to hold that any attempt to declare Christ as King in the United States of American would be "un-American" as this country was not founded as a Catholic nation, is to make a liar of, among others, Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI, who wrote:

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely wise, good, and just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men.  It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the states and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

Nations will be reminded by the annual celebration of this feast that not only private individuals but also rulers and princes are bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ. It will call to their minds the thought of the last judgment, wherein Christ, who has been cast out of public life, despised, neglected and ignored, will most severely avenge these insults; for his kingly dignity demands that the State should take account of the commandments of God and of Christian principles, both in making laws and in administering justice, and also in providing for the young a sound moral education. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)


To wit, to hold, as George Weigel did with utter and complete mockery, that for the state to declare Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as King would be open the path to declaring "Oprah Winfrey " as "queen" (or, as host Raymond Arroyo, joining in the mockery, to declare "Mohammed" as "king") is to reject the basic truth, reiterated by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910, that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order:

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. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)


The misrepresentation and mockery of the Social Reign of Christ the King exhibited by Messrs. Bottum and Weigel on EWTN was prompted by a question from a viewer who asked if there should be an amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America to declare Christ as King. The viewer was certainly well-intentioned. However, the effects of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and Americanism have been so profound that only a tiny handful of people would be disposed favorably to such an amendment.

Moreover, the conversion of any country, including the United States of America, to the Social Reign of Christ the King is the result of the conversion of its citizens to the true Faith, something that occurs organically over time as happened in the First Millennium in Europe as pagan and barbaric peoples were converted and Christendom was established (and as happened in the Second Millennium in the Americas as the Faith was implanted here following the expeditions of Christopher Columbus and, of course, the apparitions of Our Lady to Juan Diego in 1531).

That is, although governments have an obligation to recognize the Social Reign of Christ the King, an obligation that is absolute and admits of no exceptions, it my take many years for the seeds of the Faith to take root and spread so that it permeates the entirety of a nation's civil institutions and is reflect in all aspects of its popular culture.

Pope Leo XIII wrote in Libertas, June 20, 1888, that Holy Mother Church, recognizing the difficulties of the concrete circumstances in which her children find themselves in civil states organized according to the principles of Modernity, will avail herself of the "liberty" provided her by the modern, religiously indifferentist civil state to continue her work of teaching and sanctifying souls. She does so, however, without conceding in principle the foundational errors of the modern civil state, premised as they are upon the rejection of the necessity of recognizing the true Faith and of pursuing the common temporal good in light of man's Last End. And she does so without ever failing to exhort her children to pray and to work for the conversion of their fellow citizens and their nation to the true Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order:

And although in the extraordinary condition of these times the Church usually acquiesces in certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true -- that the liberty which is claimed for all to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.


To recognize this reality, however, is an entirely different matter than using the sort of question asked by the viewer of The World Over as a forum to deny in principle the teaching of the Catholic Church concerning the obligation of the civil state to recognize the true religion as men, both individually and collectively in the institutions of civil governance, seek to observe the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as these have been entrusted to her eternal safekeeping and infallible explication as they cooperate with the Sanctifying Graces won for them on the wood of the Holy Cross by Christ the King that flow into their hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is th Mediatrix of All Graces. George Weigel and Joseph Bottum, "faithful" to the denial of Catholic Social Teaching that characterizes the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes," deny in principle the eternal truths that Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the King of both men and their nations. By doing so, of course, they show themselves to be just as much outside of the pale of the Catholic Church as their currently reigning false "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

Who says so? Pope Pius XI says so:

Many believe in or claim that they believe in and hold fast to Catholic doctrine on such questions as social authority, the right of owning private property, on the relations between capital and labor, on the rights of the laboring man, on the relations between Church and State, religion and country, on the relations between the different social classes, on international relations, on the rights of the Holy See and the prerogatives of the Roman Pontiff and the Episcopate, on the social rights of Jesus Christ, Who is the Creator, Redeemer, and Lord not only of individuals but of nations. In spite of these protestations, they speak, write, and, what is more, act as if it were not necessary any longer to follow, or that they did not remain still in full force, the teachings and solemn pronouncements which may be found in so many documents of the Holy See, and particularly in those written by Leo XIII, Pius X, and Benedict XV.

There is a species of moral, legal, and social modernism which We condemn, no less decidedly than We condemn theological modernism.

It is necessary ever to keep in mind these teachings and pronouncements which We have made; it is no less necessary to reawaken that spirit of faith, of supernatural love, and of Christian discipline which alone can bring to these principles correct understanding, and can lead to their observance. This is particularly important in the case of youth, and especially those who aspire to the priesthood, so that in the almost universal confusion in which we live they at least, as the Apostle writes, will not be "tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive." (Ephesians iv, 14) (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)


Pope Pius XII wrote in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, that what is contained in papal encyclical letters does indeed bind the consciences of Catholics:

Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me"; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.)


Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger himself tried to justify conciliarism's rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the confessionally Catholic state by asserting just the opposite of what was taught by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, which was, not incidentally, a condemnation of the very "new theology" that is the essence of the Thomistic-hating Ratzinger's theological outlook, namely, that past papal pronouncements are necessarily "contingent" on the historical circumstances in which they were made, making a total mockery of the infallible guidance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, in the pontificates of the anti-liberal, anti-Modernist popes:

The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms - perhaps for the first time with this clarity - that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.

In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church's anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time.  (Joseph Ratzinger, "Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation," published with the title "Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia," in L'Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete.)


As I have noted so many times before, is it possible that God the Holy Ghost withheld this "knowledge" until the "Second" Vatican Council, that it is possible to disregard the perennial, uncontradicted teaching of the Catholic Church because of what Ratzinger/Benedict now calls the "hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity." If this is so, then the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council, who met under the infallible guidance of God the Holy Ghost, were in error when they taught as follows as ratified solemnly by Pope Pius IX:

  • For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward
    • not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
    • but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
  • Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.

The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .

3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.

But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870.)


It is impossible for any sane, rational human being to contend that there is not a fundamental contradiction between conciliarism's rejection of the confessionally Catholic civil state and the Catholic Church's consistent teaching in its support without falling under the anathema of Pope Pius IX and the Council Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council. Truth is immutable. And while, as noted before, it may be not possible at a particular time in a particular place to realize the fulfillment of the Social Reign of Christ the King, it is still imperative for Catholics to be taught about it as they are exhorted to pray and to work for the restoration of Christendom as the fruit of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as the fulfillment of Our Lady's Fatima Message.

Alas, Joseph Bottum and George Weigel, whether or not they realize it, are possessed of the spirit of Martin Luther, not the spirit of Catholicism. For it was Martin Luther's revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church that set into motion, proximately speaking, the forces that have brought us the anti-Incarnational civil state of Modernity that is premised upon one false, naturalistic notion after another. Luther himself wrote that the separation of Church and State is a necessity. Father Denis Fahey explained this in The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World:

The rending of the Mystical Body by the so-called Reformation movement has resulted in the pendulum swinging from the extreme error of Judaeo-Protestant Capitalism to the opposite extreme error of the Judaeo-Masonic-Communism of Karl Marx.

The uprise of individualism rapidly led to unbridled self-seeking. Law-makers who were arbiters of morality, as heads of the Churches, did not hesitate to favour their own enterprising spirit. The nobles and rich merchants in England, for example, who got possession of the monastery lands, which had maintained the poor, voted the poor laws in order to make the poor a charge on the nation at large. The enclosure of common lands in England and the development of the industrial system are a proof of what private judgment can do when transplanted into the realm of production and distribution. The Lutheran separation of Church from the Ruler and the Citizen shows the decay in the true idea of membership of our Lord's Mystical Body.

"Assuredly," said Luther, "a prince can be a Christian, but it is not as a Christian that he ought to govern. As a ruler, he is not called a Christian, but a prince. The man is Christian, but his function does not concern his religion."

False ideas lead to bad consequences. Always. Inevitably. Inexorably. Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order, and those who reject this truth are on the side of the devil as they are ashamed of the Social Reign of Christ the King, Who will be ashamed of them when they die if they do not repent of their Protestant/Judeo-Masonic/Modernist errors before they die.

Messrs. Bottum and Weigel appeared on EWTN to mark the publication of some book about the founder of First Things, the late "Father" Richard John Neuhaus, a "convert" from Lutheranism to conciliarism who never abjured his Lutheran errors. Indeed, the Lutheran view of Church-State relations is identical to that of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.  Richard John Neuhaus believed that he knew more that Pope Leo XIII and felt free to reject this pontiff's simple and consistent reiteration of the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church about the obligation that exists in the nature of things for the civil state to recognize the true religion and to accord it the favor and protection of the laws.

This is not surprising as Neuhaus "converted" only when what he thought was the Catholic Church had "learned" the "lessons of the Reformation:

For Mr. Neuhaus, the break with Lutheranism was another step in a long political and spiritual pilgrimage. Since the early 1970's he has moved from the front lines of the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements to a monthly column in The National Review, from the pastorate of a largely black Lutheran parish in Brooklyn to an office in midtown Manhattan decorated with citations from Ronald Reagan.

But in a recent interview, he emphasized that his decision to leave the church was theological, not political. Mr. Neuhaus has long been identified with a strand in Lutheranism that calls itself ''evangelical catholic,'' with a small c. This group stresses that Luther's Reformation was aimed not at establishing a separate church but at bringing a united Christian church into line with the Reformers' view of the Gospel.

That 16th-century split may have been tragically unavoidable, Mr. Neuhaus said, but it must not become a purpose in itself; it was justified only until Roman Catholicism accepted the lessons of the Reformation.

That moment arrived, Mr. Neuhaus said, with the Second Vatican Council 25 years ago and the growth of agreement between Catholics and Lutherans since then. (Saying Luther's Goal Was One Church, Noted Lutheran Turns to Catholicism.)


Yes, the spirit of conciliarism as regards Church-State religions is one with the spirit of Protestantism and with the spirit of the naturalism of Judeo-Masonry. It is no wonder at all that Joseph Bottum and George Weigel, admirers of the late "Father" Neuhaus, deny that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ must be the King of men and their nations, no less that Mr. Weigel feels free to mock the Social Reign of Our Lord that was exemplified so well by rulers such as Edward the Confessor, Canute of Denmark, Louis IX of France, Casimir of Poland, Stephen of Hungary, Wenceslaus of Bohemia, each of whom Holy Mother Church has raised to her altars as saints. Although I, who am being justly punished at this time for my many sins by the scorn that is being heaped upon me by so many, have much for which to make reparation before I die, I, despite my sins and failings, will never fail to remind one and all that to reject the Social Reign of Christ the King is to reject the Catholic Faith in its entirety.

We must be champions of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen, champions of the Catholic Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal, champions of the truth that Catholicism is the and only foundation of personal and social order. Those who disagree do so at the peril to the nation they say they love but for which they have a false sense of nationalistic pride that impedes her conversion to the true Faith, which is what Our Lord Himself mandates for each nation on the face of this earth.

May the Rosaries we pray each day, especially during this coming season of Advent, which begins with first vespers tonight, help to bring about the restoration of the Church Militant on earth and the Social Reign of Christ the King in the world so that every heart, consecrated to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, will exclaim these stirring words that were uttered by Father Miguel Augustin Pro, S.J., when he was shot to death by the Masonic revolutionaries on November 23, 1927:

Viva Cristo Rey!

We must remember these words that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Our King, spoke to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque:

"I will reign in spite of all who oppose Me." (quoted in: The Right Reverend Emile Bougaud. The Life of Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers in 1990, p. 361.)

Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Catherine Laboure, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints






© Copyright 2009, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.