1 Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
                  January 18, 2012

Broken Clocks Are Wrong 1438 of 1440 Minutes Each Day

by Thomas A. Droleskey

The worldwide heresy that is "religious liberty" has most, although not all, of its origins right in the Constitution of the United States of America, specifically in the First Amendment, which was one of twelve amendments proposed by the First Congress, ten of which were ratified and became part of the Constitution on December 15, 1791. (An eleventh of those twelve amendments, forbidding any pay raise for members of the United States Congress from going into effect until an intervening election for members of the House of Representative, was ratified in 1992, becoming the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.) The First Amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Gaggles of Americanist Catholics have tried to contend over the years that the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America affords Catholics with the opportunity to practice their Faith openly without any overt persecution from the Federal government, making this country a haven of "religious freedom" in contradistinction to the United Kingdom, which suppressed the Faith and imposed repressive measures upon Catholics on the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

Thus we see, as I have noted many times on this site, the cleverness of the devil in raising up "bad" Protestants, those who attacked the Faith and Catholics loyal to it with violent ferocity, in order to make "good" Protestants, those who were willing to "tolerate" Catholics, look better by comparison. Lost in this truly diabolical trap is the simple fact  placing the true religion on a level of equality with false religions makes it impossible for any religion to oppose the efforts of atheists or anti-Theists from asserting themselves in the "public marketplace of ideas." Irreligion becomes as good as religion. There is no rational, coherent basis by which one can oppose the spread of actual demonic "worship" or its variants, including witchcraft and the New Age "spiritualities," into every aspect of society. The First Amendment thus makes it far easier for the devil to snatch souls from the true Faith by making "religious liberty" or "religious freedom" into a protected "civil right" that no one can oppose lest he put into jeopardy the ability of his own religious denomination to practice its tenets freely.

Defenders of all things American, including self-styled Constitutionalists from the ranks of the multitude of heretical and/or schismatic Protestant sects, claim that the framers of the Constitution were not indifferent to religion, that they simply recognized that it would be impossible in a religiously pluralistic country to choose a "national" religion, preferring to leave the matter of established religions up to the state governments, which remained free to erect established churches prior to the application of various provisions of the Bill of Rights, which, as written, are only limitations upon the actions of the Federal government and not the state governments, to state governments by virtue of a twisted reading of the Fourteenth Amendment's "due process of law" clause from the time of Gitlow v. New York (1925) to our present day. The framers, these defenders of all things American argue, did not mean to exclude the expression of religious convictions from public life. The framers meant merely, we are told, to prevent the sort of "religious warfare" that had been common in Europe in the centuries before the American founding, which is why they, the framers, believed it inopportune to have a nationally established church of any kind.

There are, of course, many serious problems with these theses, starting with the fact that the "religious wars" in the two and one-half centuries leading up to the "founding" of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic United States of America were engendered by Protestantism. Many of them were fought between competing sects of Protestants, as was the case during the English Civil War between 1641 and 1649 as Anglicans and Puritans, the English followers of John Calvin who wanted to "purify" the Anglican Church founded by the lustful King Henry VIII of its remaining "Catholic" trappings (a "hierarchy," a "sacramental" system, veneration of Our Lady and a select number of other saints), fought each other (with a wide variety of motivations and goals), resulting in the overthrow and beheading of King Charles I. The framers of the Constitution of the United States of America had a warped, myopic view of history, being unwilling to look at the truth of the glory of the Middle Ages, summarized so succinctly by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

There was once a time when States were governed by the philosophy of the Gospel. Then it was that the power and divine virtue of Christian wisdom had diffused itself throughout the laws, institutions, and morals of the people, permeating all ranks and relations of civil society. Then, too, the religion instituted by Jesus Christ, established firmly in befitting dignity, flourished everywhere, by the favor of princes and the legitimate protection of magistrates; and Church and State were happily united in concord and friendly interchange of good offices. The State, constituted in this wise, bore fruits important beyond all expectation, whose remembrance is still, and always will be, in renown, witnessed to as they are by countless proofs which can never be blotted out or ever obscured by any craft of any enemies. Christian Europe has subdued barbarous nations, and changed them from a savage to a civilized condition, from superstition to true worship. It victoriously rolled back the tide of Mohammedan conquest; retained the headship of civilization; stood forth in the front rank as the leader and teacher of all, in every branch of national culture; bestowed on the world the gift of true and many-sided liberty; and most wisely founded very numerous institutions for the solace of human suffering. And if we inquire how it was able to bring about so altered a condition of things, the answer is -- beyond all question, in large measure, through religion, under whose auspices so many great undertakings were set on foot, through whose aid they were brought to completion. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)


Secondly, the framers of the Constitution of the United States of America, being the products of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and various combinations of errors emanating from the so-called "Age of Reason" or "Enlightenment," failed to understand the simple truth that God has rights above His contingent beings, that His Incarnation in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother changed everything about human history, that He established only one true Church upon the Rock of Saint Peter, the Pope, to be the means by which men can know order in their own lives individually and in the larger lives of their societies collectively. Anyone who rejects these simple truths, no matter his "good intentions," charts a course of utter destruction for himself and his fellow citizens. False ideas lead to bad consequences, inevitably and inexorably. Neither the wide variety of permutations coming under the aegis of Protestantism or the naturalist, anti-Incarnational philosophies of Judeo-Masonry can ever be the basis of personal or social order. Personal and social ruin are the only things that can result from false ideas, which Pope Leo XIII pointed out in Immortale Dei:

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God.

So, too, the liberty of thinking, and of publishing, whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrance, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountain-head and origin of many evils. Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. These remain ever one and the same, and are no less unchangeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption. Whatever, therefore, is opposed to virtue and truth may not rightly be brought temptingly before the eye of man, much less sanctioned by the favor and protection of the law. A well-spent life is the only way to heaven, whither all are bound, and on this account the State is acting against the laws and dictates of nature whenever it permits the license of opinion and of action to lead minds astray from truth and souls away from the practice of virtue. To exclude the Church, founded by God Himself, from the business of life, from the making of laws, from the education of youth, from domestic society is a grave and fatal error. A State from which religion is banished can never be well regulated; and already perhaps more than is desirable is known of the nature and tendency of the so-called civil philosophy of life and morals. The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals. She it is who preserves in their purity the principles from which duties flow, and, by setting forth most urgent reasons for virtuous life, bids us not only to turn away from wicked deeds, but even to curb all movements of the mind that are opposed to reason, even though they be not carried out in action. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)


As men are made by God to know, love and to serve Him as He has revealed Himself exclusively through His Catholic Church, which alone provides men with the means of their interior sanctification and is thus the sole means of human salvation, it opposed to the very Will of God to permit those who believe in false religions and false philosophies the "civil" right to propagate them openly. God does not want the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood deceived about First and Last Things. He wants all men and all nations to honor Him as their King, which is one of the lessons He was teaching us as Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar worshiped Him at the Epiphany. The Protestant and Judeo-Masonic and conciliarist notion of "religious liberty," having such tremendous roots in the Constitution of the United States of America, and of separation of Church and State thus are at odds with Divine Revelation itself, as Pope Saint Pius X noted in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906:

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. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)


The Modern, religiously indifferentist, anti-Incarnational civil state thus becomes a breeding ground for the propagation and multiplication of errors and heresies and blasphemies, none of which have any "civil" right to exist as they offend Our Lord and wound the souls for whom He offered up His life to the Father in Spirit and in Truth on the wood of the Holy Cross. Pope Gregory XVI elaborated on these points in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832:

Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that "there is one God, one faith, one baptism" may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that "those who are not with Christ are against Him," and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore "without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate." Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: "He who is for the See of Peter is for me." A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: "The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?"

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again?


A civil state that is open to all religions and to irreligion is a manifestly dangerous places for souls. How can Mohammedans or Communists or Talmudic Jews or Freemasons or Socialists or Wiccans or Satanists be excluded from public office in such a system. They cannot, especially when one considers the words of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.


Defenders of all things American contend that the "no religious test" clause permits Catholics, who had been disenfranchised in the United Kingdom and Ireland, to hold public office. Isn't that nice? What the "no religious test" clause of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States permits also is for atheists and deists and Freemasons and Mohammedans and Wiccans or anyone else to hold public office and thus to seek to use the civil laws as the means to enshrine their false beliefs. Once again, there is no rational, coherent basis to oppose the advances made by baby-killers and perverts when a civil government admits that there is no Divinely-instituted authority to which it must submit itself when the good of souls demands such submission. Everything contained in the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the natural law becomes negotiable. Everything. And given the fact that the devil never rests, those who seek to defend society in a non-denominational or even secular manner against various objective evils begin to look upon "compromise" as a sign of progress, thereby institutionalizing evil more and more by means of civil law and in the nooks and crannies of popular culture, a point made very tellingly by Pope Leo XIII in Libertas, June 20, 1888:

But, to judge aright, we must acknowledge that, the more a State is driven to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection; and that the tolerance of evil which is dictated by political prudence should be strictly confined to the limits which its justifying cause, the public welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolerance would be injurious to the public welfare, and entail greater evils on the State, it would not be lawful; for in such case the motive of good is wanting. 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.

And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the equity and prudence of the Church are those who profess what is called liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which We have spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such an abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as being wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to lavish liberty on all in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant toward the Catholic Church, by refusing to allow her the liberty of being herself free. (Pope Leo XIII in Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888.)


This is not a matter of ethereal speculation having nothing to with the real lives of human beings. Not at all. The heresy of religious liberty, which is at the heart of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, devastates souls. The belief that those who belong to false religions have a "civil right" to propagate themselves and that their false beliefs can contribute to the betterment of society make it impossible to exclude those false religions from making their presence felt everywhere in society, especially in "educational" institutions, where the tender souls of the young become ready prey to false ideas that are propagandized by charismatic professors. This is true in the United States of America and elsewhere in the allegedly "free" world of "democratic republics.

Indeed, I receive a most poignant just about five years ago now from a reader, whose name and country will not be revealed, explaining how his own daughter was snatched out of the Faith by Wiccans, who were permitted free rein to promote their demonic beliefs a publicly-run university. Here is an edited version of the e-mail so as to protect its author from being identified:

Our eldest daughter became involved with a group of young girls who embraced the "gaia" movement and call themselves witches. She ran away from home two and a half years ago and we cannot contact her at all now. Our last contact was over a year ago when she proclaimed to her mother that Jesus was not God during a telephone call. She has given up her studies in her final year of studies at a local university, which we found out from university officials.


A Catholic state would forbid the public propagation of all false religions. While the Church will tolerate the existence of false religions in some instances so as not to do violence to human free will, she does recognize that certain false religions are more dangerous than others and insists that those worshiping demons be wiped out in their entirety. Even the private "practice" of such false religions is dangerous to society as it directly serves the purposes of the adversary, admitting that all false religions, including the multitudinous variety of Protestant sects, are from the devil and do his bidding by keeping men from knowing God as He has revealed Himself exclusively through the Catholic Church and keeping their immortal souls from being sanctifying means of the supernatural helps available only through the administration of the Sacraments that Our Lord has entrusted only to the Catholic Church.

There is, however, no means by which a secular, religiously indifferentist civil state can prevent even openly demonic religions from forming and operating publicly. The government of the United States of America, for example, has permitted "Wiccans" to have their own chaplains in its armed forces, which frequently forbid the public expression of the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in "mixed" company by Catholic and Protestant chaplains. Anyone who says that God looks favorably upon all of this in the name of "religious freedom" is mad, as in insane, including the conciliarists who speak endlessly about the "necessity" of all nations embracing this heresy.

What can Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, a principal supporter of "religious liberty" or "religious freedom," say to the individual whose daughter is now in the hands of Wiccans and no longer believes in the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? Can this enemy of souls, who does not believe that the Catholic Church has a mission to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of everyone outside of the ranks of the Catholic Church to her maternal bosom, say that devil worshipers have a "civil right" to propagate their demonic worship? Would he say certain religions are really not religions and could be prohibited by the civil state? Upon what grounds would a civil state that is officially indifferent to the Catholic Church base such a prohibition? One's man's "devil" is another man's "god," the secularists would argue, no?

You see, ladies and gentlemen, there is no stopping the logical and inexorable devolution of men and their societies into the abyss of state-sponsored godlessness once the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King is accepted as an "irreversible" fact of history that requires us to make our "reconciliation" with the "principles of 1789.

Even though the broken clock that is the Supreme Court of the United States of America can be right now and again, it must be remembered that broken clocks are wrong 1438 of the 1440 minutes in a day. With nothing to guide the justices who sit on it than the words of the Constitution, which make no provision for Christ the King or even for any generic reference to the Holy Name of the Divine Redeemer Who is the King of all men and all nations, including the United States of America, the nation is thus held captive as the justices adhere to a policy of "state neutrality" concerning the identity of the true God of Divine Revelation in general and of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity made Man in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother. This is exactly what happened yesterday as the august Supreme Court, headed by a Catholic Chief Justice, John Roberts, who belongs to Opus Dei, which is, of course, not the work of God, and on which serves five other Catholics (Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonya Sotomayor) let stand a ruling of the United States Circuit Court for the Fourth Circuit (Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina) that the Holy Name of Jesus could not be mentioned more than once or twice in a public prayer at an official government function:

Pastors and priests in five states cannot mention 'Jesus' more than once or twice if they pray in public at an official function after the U.S. Supreme Court stunned constitutional law experts earlier today by letting stand a lower court ruling.

‘Legislative prayer’ is what courts call the tradition of legislative bodies (Congress, state legislators, town councils, etc.) beginning their meetings with an invocation.

Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that when pastors and priests offer such prayers, it’s okay to mention the name of Jesus Christ once or maybe twice.

But if Jesus’ name is mentioned frequently, or if the prayer includes statements of Christian beliefs (such as the forgiveness of sins, Jesus’ resurrection, or Jesus as the Son of God), then the prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, and must be banned.

This was a 2-1 split decision written by Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson. Judge Paul Niemeyer wrote an outstanding dissent, showing how judicial censorship of clergy-led prayer goes to the heart of what the Establishment Clause was designed to prevent.

The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari to take up this case and reverse the Fourth Circuit’s wrongheaded decision. Multiple states filed briefs supporting this petition, as did a group of U.S. congressmen.

The case had all the elements of being cert-worthy (i.e. deserving of the justices agreeing to decide the case). Yet in today’s orders, the Court denied the petition, thereby declining to review the case.

That means the Fourth Circuit’s decision is now the law of the land in the five states in Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

David Cortman, ADF’s lead counsel said, “we are obviously disappointed that the Supreme Court did not agree to hear our case on behalf of the Forsyth County Commissioners and the local community.

“We continue to believe that the lower court’s decision requiring public officials to censor the prayers of private citizens is inconsistent with historical practice and constitutional requirements.  ADF will continue to defend legislative prayer throughout the country until the Supreme Courts hears a case that clears up the confusion.”              

Just last week, the Court handed down the most significant victory for religious liberty in decades, recognizing a ministerial exception to federal employment laws. Yet the Court today allows this Fourth Circuit decision stand, at least for now.

Other legislative prayer cases are in the federal court system, including another ADF case, Galloway v. Town of Greece, before the Second Circuit.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will take one of these cases soon and end this form of censorship of religious expression in the public square. (Shocker! Supreme Court lets stand lower bench's ban on saying the Name of Jesus too often.)


This is not a "shock" at all. This is just the logical consequence of land that does not confess Christ the King and subordinate itself at all times in all that pertains to the good of souls to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law as they have been entrusted by Him to His true Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. Shocking? Only for those who refuse to open their eyes to see the truth that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Have you read that before somewhere, just perhaps? Maybe?

Indeed, the social consequences of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King are vast, starting with the destruction of the family, which has been rent asunder by divorce and contraception and feminism and materialism and positivism and utilitarianism and the organized forces of naturalism. The atomistic individualism of Calvinist capitalism and Lockean liberalism thus produce the same sort of societies as that produced by all forms Socialism, including that wrought by Bolshevism, as critiqued by Pope Pius XI in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937:

Communism, moreover, strips man of his liberty, robs human personality of all its dignity, and removes all the moral restraints that check the eruptions of blind impulse. There is no recognition of any right of the individual in his relations to the collectivity; no natural right is accorded to human personality, which is a mere cog-wheel in the Communist system. In man's relations with other individuals, besides, Communists hold the principle of absolute equality, rejecting all hierarchy and divinely-constituted authority, including the authority of parents. What men call authority and subordination is derived from the community as its first and only font. Nor is the individual granted any property rights over material goods or the means of production, for inasmuch as these are the source of further wealth, their possession would give one man power over another. Precisely on this score, all forms of private property must be eradicated, for they are at the origin of all economic enslavement .

Refusing to human life any sacred or spiritual character, such a doctrine logically makes of marriage and the family a purely artificial and civil institution, the outcome of a specific economic system. There exists no matrimonial bond of a juridico-moral nature that is not subject to the whim of the individual or of the collectivity. Naturally, therefore, the notion of an indissoluble marriage-tie is scouted. Communism is particularly characterized by the rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust instead into public life and collective production under the same conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right.

What would be the condition of a human society based on such materialistic tenets? It would be a collectivity with no other hierarchy than that of the economic system. It would have only one mission: the production of material things by means of collective labor, so that the goods of this world might be enjoyed in a paradise where each would "give according to his powers" and would "receive according to his needs." Communism recognizes in the collectivity the right, or rather, unlimited discretion, to draft individuals for the labor of the collectivity with no regard for their personal welfare; so that even violence could be legitimately exercised to dragoon the recalcitrant against their wills. In the Communistic commonwealth morality and law would be nothing but a derivation of the existing economic order, purely earthly in origin and unstable in character. In a word. the Communists claim to inaugurate a new era and a new civilization which is the result of blind evolutionary forces culminating in a humanity without God. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)


A world devoid of God and of submission to His true Church is the only possible consequence of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ King. Naturalist liberals disagree with naturalist socialists, including communists, only about a few details. All forms of naturalism produce the godless world, which makes possible barbarism in "liberal" states and totalitarianism in "socialist" states. Indeed, the degree to which men fall into the naturalist trap will be the degree to which all states, liberal and socialist, get to increase their power over the lives of ordinary citizens in the name of "law and order" and "national security," you understand. The heresy of religious liberty makes it impossible for anyone to find any one overarching means by which social evils can be retarded, resulting in a new caste of dictators whose "infallible" pronouncements must be accepted without criticism or dissent. The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, for example, eviscerates the First Commandment by stating unequivocally that no religion, including the Catholic Faith, must be recognized by the civil state as indispensable for personal and social order, thus resulting in the triumph of the false religion of statism. A neat little trick of the devil, wouldn't you say?

Pope Pius XI alluded to some of these points in Divini Redemptoris:

But the enemies of the Church, though forced to acknowledge the wisdom of her doctrine, accuse her of having failed to act in conformity with her principles, and from this conclude to the necessity of seeking other solutions. The utter falseness and injustice of this accusation is shown by the whole history of Christianity. To refer only to a single typical trait, it was Christianity that first affirmed the real and universal brotherhood of all men of whatever race and condition. This doctrine she proclaimed by a method, and with an amplitude and conviction, unknown to preceding centuries; and with it she potently contributed to the abolition of slavery. Not bloody revolution, but the inner force of her teaching made the proud Roman matron see in her slave a sister in Christ. It is Christianity that adores the Son of God, made Man for love of man, and become not only the "Son of a Carpenter" but Himself a "Carpenter."[19] It was Christianity that raised manual labor to its true dignity, whereas it had hitherto been so despised that even the moderate Cicero did not hesitate to sum up the general opinion of his time in words of which any modern sociologist would be ashamed: "All artisans are engaged in sordid trades, for there can be nothing ennobling about a workshop."

Faithful to these principles, the Church has given new life to human society. Under her influence arose prodigious charitable organizations, great guilds of artisans and workingmen of every type. These guilds, ridiculed as "medieval" by the liberalism of the last century, are today claiming the admiration of our contemporaries in many countries who are endeavoring to revive them in some modern form. And when other systems hindered her work and raised obstacles to the salutary influence of the Church, she was never done warning them of their error. We need but recall with what constant firmness and energy Our Predecessor, Leo XIII, vindicated for the workingman the right to organize, which the dominant liberalism of the more powerful States relentlessly denied him. Even today the authority of this Church doctrine is greater than it seems; for the influence of ideas in the realm of facts, though invisible and not easily measured, is surely of predominant importance.

It may be said in all truth that the Church, like Christ, goes through the centuries doing good to all. There would be today neither Socialism nor Communism if the rulers of the nations had not scorned the teachings and maternal warnings of the Church. On the bases of liberalism and laicism they wished to build other social edifices which, powerful and imposing as they seemed at first, all too soon revealed the weakness of their foundations, and today are crumbling one after another before our eyes, as everything must crumble that is not grounded on the one corner stone which is Christ Jesus.

This, Venerable Brethren, is the doctrine of the Church, which alone in the social as in all other fields can offer real light and assure salvation in the face of Communistic ideology. But this doctrine must be consistently reduced to practice in every-day life, according to the admonition of St. .James the Apostle: "Be ye doers of the word and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves." The most urgent need of the present day is therefore the energetic and timely application of remedies which will effectively ward off the catastrophe that daily grows more threatening. We cherish the firm hope that the fanaticism with which the sons of darkness work day and night at their materialistic and atheistic propaganda will at least serve the holy purpose of stimulating the sons of light to a like and even greater zeal for the honor of the Divine Majesty. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)


Although he was quite a foe of Catholicism, the Russian Orthodox writer Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn made much the same point in his June 8, 1978, commencement address, "A World Split Apart," at Harvard University, explaining that the false currents of liberalism had to bring about Marxism-Leninism:

As humanism in its development was becoming more and more materialistic, it also increasingly allowed concepts to be used first by socialism and then by communism, so that Karl Marx was able to say, in 1844, that "communism is naturalized humanism."

This statement has proved to be not entirely unreasonable. One does not see the same stones in the foundations of an eroded humanism and of any type of socialism: boundless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility (which under Communist regimes attains the stage of antireligious dictatorship); concentration on social structures with an allegedly scientific approach. (This last is typical of both the Age of Enlightenment and of Marxism.) It is no accident that all of communism's rhetorical vows revolve around 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, moreover, that the current of materialism which is farthest to the left, and is hence the most consistent, always proves to be stronger, more attractive, and victorious. Humanism which has lost its Christian heritage cannot prevail in this competition. Thus during the past centuries and especially in recent decades, as the process became more acute, the alignment of forces was as follows: Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism could not stand up to communism. (Alexander Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart, June 8, 1978.)


What Dr. Solzhenitsyn would not accept, being a committed Russian nationalist wedded to the errors Photius that constituted all forms of Orthodoxy, is that the one and only way to retard all forms of naturalism, including those of the liberal and socialist strains, is with Catholicism. Pope Leo XIII noted in this in A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902:



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. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine Assistance and of that immortality which has been promised It, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the Commands which It has received, to carry the Doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect It in Its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel It does not reveal Itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of Justice and Charity, and the Propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of Its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which It proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of t ruth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

The anti-Incarnational lie of Americanism is the lie of Martin Luther and Judeo-Masonry all rolled into one, that is, the lie that the true Church must not be recognized by the civil state as its official religion. This is false, as I quoted Pope Saint Pius X's firm declaration in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, cited earlier in this article. This lie was also exploded by the late Louis-Edouard-François-Desiré Cardinal Pie, as can be see in this passage from Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie of Poitiers (which is available from Mr. Hugh Akin's Catholic Action Resource Center):


"If Jesus Christ," proclaims Msgr. Pie in a magnificent pastoral instruction, "if Jesus Christ Who is our light whereby we are drawn out of the seat of darkness and from the shadow of death, and Who has given to the world the treasure of truth and grace, if He has not enriched the world, I mean to say the social and political world itself, from the great evils which prevail in the heart of paganism, then it is to say that the work of Jesus Christ is not a divine work. Even more so: if the Gospel which would save men is incapable of procuring the actual progress of peoples, if the revealed light which is profitable to individuals is detrimental to society at large, if the scepter of Christ, sweet and beneficial to souls, and perhaps to families, is harmful and unacceptable for cities and empires; in other words, if Jesus Christ to whom the Prophets had promised and to Whom His Father had given the nations as a heritage, is not able to exercise His authority over them for it would be to their detriment and temporal disadvantage, it would have to be concluded that Jesus Christ is not God". . . .

"To say Jesus Christ is the God of individuals and of families, but not the God of peoples and of societies, is to say that He is not God. To say that Christianity is the law of individual man and is not the law of collective man, is to say that Christianity is not divine. To say that the Church is the judge of private morality, but has nothing to do with public and political morality, is to say that the Church is not divine."

In fine, Cardinal Pie insists:

"Christianity would not be divine if it were to have existence within individuals but not with regard to societies."

Fr. de St. Just asks, in conclusion:

"Could it be proven in clearer terms that social atheism conduces to individualistic atheism?"


Just look at yesterday's decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America if you have any doubt as to whether the social atheism of religious indifferentism leads to individualistic atheism. There can be no neutrality between Christ the King and the devil. None. Broken clocks are still wrong 1438 of 1440 minutes of each day.

We must understand, ladies and gentlemen, that there the pernicious heresy of religious liberty, extolled by Americanists and conciliarists alike, blasphemes Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and wounds the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross. She who has crushed the head the serpent, Our Lady, will show forth the Triumph of her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart one day, crushing the anti-Incarnational heresies of Modernity and Modernism in a flash.

May we, by adhering to the perennial teachings that Our Lord deposited exclusively in the Catholic Church and by seeking out the fullness of the Faith in catacombs where no concessions are made to conciliarism or to the "legitimacy" of the false officials of the counterfeit church, plant a few seeds for that glorious Triumph, starting with a five-decade Rosary right now. Nothing less than a new Christendom depends on our daily fulfillment of Our Lady's Fatima Message, which is the foe of all forms of naturalism in the world in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. The leaders of all nations will then understand that the First Commandment obliges them to pay homage to Christ the King and to Mary our Immaculate Queen, giving the strange gods of false religions no public quarter whatsoever.


Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of Guadalupe, 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.

See also: A Litany of Saints



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