Care Not for the Rights of Christ the King, Care Not for the Babies
by Thomas A. Droleskey
Most of my adult life has been spent dealing with the wreckage caused by the false religion of conciliarsm. True enough, I was "late," indeed, very late, to recognize conciliarism as a false religion. However, I knew that what was passing for Catholicism in most parishes and schools and universities and colleges and seminaries under the control of the conciliarists was the antithesis of the Catholic Faith, believing that "Rome" would "do" something if only we could "provide" the right amount of information to the proper authorities, including Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II (starting on October 16, 1978), which I realize know was an exercise a little akin to letting a police officer (I do know of at least one such officer, a detective sergeant on the New York City Police Department in the 1920s) on the take of a rum-runner during the Prohibition Era that a moonshining operation was going on in his precinct. Such a crooked cop would have tipped off the rum-runner about the identity of the tipster so as to move the operation elsewhere (and/or to have the tipster roughed up a little bit).
Well, the same has been true with the conciliar authorities in Rome during what I believed, quite delusionally, obviously, was going to be the "restoration" of the Church during the false pontificate of John Paul II starting in 1978. For the most part, admitting exceptions here and there, including at least one in which I was involved quite actively, conciliar authorities in Rome have looked the other way as one "bad bishop" after another either did things himself--or countenanced things by subordinates under his direct supervision and control--that were contrary even to the approved novelties and innovations and errors of conciliarism. It was saddening to me, a college professor of political science for three decades, to see so many young Catholics who were clueless about the Faith. As I have noted on so many occasions in the past, most of these young Catholics knew next to nothing about the Faith, and the little that they thought they knew was wrong. Yes, sure, there were exceptions. For the most part, though, it was heartbreaking to see the wreckage of souls unfold right before my very eyes year after year after year.
There would be little need for a professor political science to have to review basic facts of the Faith in courses in political science if young Catholics had not been the victims of educational fraud on the part of the conciliarists responsibility for filling their immortal souls with all manner of apostasies, both those approved by conciliarism officially (false ecumenism, religious liberty, separation of Church and State, episcopal collegiality) and those unapproved by conciliarism "officially" but proceed from its false spirit (universal salvation, religious indifferentism, the deconstruction of Sacred Scripture, denials of Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility). As one cannot understand politics without understanding human nature--and as one cannot understand human nature without understanding Special Creation and Original Sin, it was necessary for me to teach such foundational truths in each of my political science classes, something that did not bode well for my long term career security, especially in conciliar-controlled institutions (although I was not exactly beloved by secularists, especially at Nassau Community College in Garden City, New York, from 1980-1983 and at Morningside College in Sioux City, Iowa, from 1992-1993).
One of the most galling things about teaching the unchanging truths of the Catholic Faith over the course of my teaching career was that there would instances aplenty when my reiteration of such basic teaching as Original Sin and Actual Sin and the necessity of making a good, integral Confession of one's sins should one, God forbid, fall into any Mortal Sins, would be contradicted by a conciliar priest. One such "priest" went so far as to say that he did not believe in the doctrine of Transubstantiation. Others denied the actual Bodily Resurrection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Most Blessed Mother's perpetual virginity or her complete freedom from all stain of Original Sin and Actual Sin as a result of her Immaculate Conception. One conciliar priest, himself a believer but prone to viewing the world most naturalistically, said to me once, "Forget about the Faith in the classroom. Just teach political science and you'll be able to have some income for a change." How can one "just teach political science" without explaining that there can be no order within souls and thus within nations unless individual men conform themselves at all times and in all things to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication and without having belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace?
I am sure that many of you reading this brief reflection (as I mentioned on my home page yesterday, these long distance drives are becoming a form of penance when once--and not so long ago--they were but jaunts to the corner market and back) have had your own experiences in this regard. That is, some of you have doubtless had the most unfortunate occasion to have had your own teaching of the Faith to your children contradicted by some conciliar priest or sister or lay teacher at some point or another. Who are you, some of your children might have asked, to contradict the priest or the sister or the teacher? Great damage has been done to souls in the process. Indeed, great damage has been done to the integrity of families as parents have seen their children stray from the Faith, frequently into the waiting arms of all manner of Protestant and New Age sects, and have seen their children's children raised in heretical sects or pagan cults. And this is to say nothing about all of the lies that have been told to justify the monstrous abomination that is the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, which caters to a sense of community self-congratulations and universal salvation as great offense is given to God Himself in the context what is alleged to be the "ordinary form of the one Roman Rite."
The plain fact of the matter in all of this is the "bad" "bishops" are supported fully by the conciliar authorities in Rome. Even those who bankrupt their dioceses, both spiritually and financially, are held in high esteem and protected (see Mahony, Roger), it not promoted and permitted to have tremendous influence in the selection of "bishops" in the United States of America (see Law, Bernard). Even those "bishops" who are said to be "pro-life" (isn't every Catholic supposed to be opposed to the slaughter of the innocent preborn, whether by surgical or chemical means, without any exception whatsoever?) offer the hideous abomination that is the Novus Ordo, embrace with full-throats the lies of religious liberty and false ecumenism and the new ecclesiology, refusing to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of all men to the true Faith, and undermine the innocence and the purity of the young by countenancing, if not actually endorsing, the sort of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that was prohibited in no uncertain terms by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.
Why should it come as any surprise that "bad" "bishops," the men who have been most active in their embrace of the most ultra-progressive brand of conciliarism imaginable and whose refusal to condemn the perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that are actually justified in many of their "religious education" programs, have endorsed such things as the dispensing of the "morning after" abortifacient contraceptives in Catholic hospitals and have no problem with granting full professional privileges to actual surgical baby-killers at such hospitals? Abort the Faith, my friends, and you will abort the innocent preborn?
Why should it come as any surprise that "bad" "bishops" (in Georgia and Montana) actually discourage and disapprove strongly of efforts to have state legislatures declare the simple biological fact that life begins at fertilization? This is not news, my friends. Indeed, there is not much need to spend any time on this lunacy as it is but a symptom of the larger sickness: the false religion of conciliarism. For just as Protestantism has mutated into over thirty-three thousand different sects, some adhering to "elements of truth" and others about as pagan as one can get without becoming Druids, so is it also true that conciliarism, being a false religion, has mutated into a variety of beliefs, as I noted last week in High Church, Low Church. This is all part of the One World Ecumenical Church that whose future was prophesied and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:
We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind."
And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.
Some conciliarists are opposed to abortion without exception. Some are opposed to abortion with some exceptions. Some are supportive of baby-killing on demand. Each is able, with only a few rare exceptions in the past thirty years, to remain a conciliarist in good standing with their conciliar dioceses and with the conciliar Vatican. Indeed, conciliar priests and members of the laity who complain publicly about the activities of the bishop-protectors of spiritual and moral perverts find themselves on at least some occasions in more canonical jeopardy in the conciliar structures than do those who support objective evils (abortion, contraception, perversity, usury, the usurpation of parental control over education by the state, etc). How many "Catholics" in public life who support the taking of innocent human life under cover of law have been "excommunicated" in the past thirty-five years?
Oh, the One World Ecumenical Church that is the counterfeit church of conciliarism may issue all manner of condemnations of this or that moral evil. These condemnation, however, mean nothing when one considers the simple truth that conciliarism is founded in the same lie as Protestantism: the rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King as essential to the right ordering of men and their societies. The lecherous Augustinian monk named Father Martin Luther specifically and categorically rejected the Social Reign of Christ the King, endorsing the falsity of "separation of Church and State" that has become the hallmark and foundational cornerstone of the naturalistic, religiously indifferentist, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian modern civil state. Care not for the rights of Christ the King, my good readers, and you will not care for the rights of the innocent preborn. Care not for the good of the soul, as indicated by diffidence to--or actually enthusiasm for--any kinds of sins, each of which caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and caused Seven Swords of Sorrow to be plunged through and through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother, you will serve as the instruments of undermining social order no matter how long and hard you protest about empty slogans such as "social justice" and "international peace and solidarity in our civilization of love."
There is no need to belabor points made on this site repeatedly about the disastrous consequences that the world has suffered as a result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and cemented in place by the rise of Judeo-Masonry and aided and abetted by a whole assortment of naturalistic ideologies and "philosophies" that claim to possess the "key" to ordering nations rightly. There is only one path to personal and social order, Catholicism, a simple little fact that is spat upon by naturalists of all sorts, including those of the false opposites of the "right" and the "left." Although naturalists have differences one with the other, they have this much in common with Protestants and with the conciliarists: each rejects a belief in Catholicism as absolutely essential to the salvation of individual souls and thus to the right ordering of nations and to a world peace that is founded in the peace of the Divine Redeemer Himself and is premised upon a reliance upon the Mercy of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the intercessory power of the Immaculate Heart of the Queen of Peace, the Blessed Virgin Mary.
We must take heart in these troubling times, during which the ecclesiastical crisis makes it all the more difficult to comprehend the world clearly through the eyes of the true Faith and thus convinces all manner of believing Catholics to trust in naturalistic "solutions" to the problems that are caused by Original Sin and our own Actual Sins, by remembering that there is nothing--not one thing--that we can suffer at any time in our own lives that is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour jesus Christ to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and caused His Most Blessed Mother to suffer as she stood by Him at the foot of the Cross. The graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood on Good Friday and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces, are sufficient to deal with whatever crosses that come our way. Suffering is our path to salvation. We must embrace the crosses of the present moment and lift them high as the consecrated slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Father Frederick Faber, writing in The Foot of the Cross (also known as The Dolors of Mary), put it this way 151 years ago:
Such was the fifth dolor, with its creative periods of sanctity and sorrow. She [Our Lady] had stood through it all, notwithstanding the agonizing yesterday, the sleepless night, the long morning crowded with its terrible phenomena. In the strength of her unfailing weariness she had stood through it all, and Scripture is careful to mark the posture, as if this miracle of endurance was of itself a reward for her dolor, that we cannot preach Christ Crucified unless Mary be in sight. It is something else we preach--not that--unless she be standing there. And now she stands on Calvary alone. It is three hours past noon of the most awful day the world shall ever see.
Something still remains to be said of the peculiarities of this dolor, notwithstanding that so much has been unavoidably anticipated in the narrative. Above all things, the Crucifixion has this peculiarity, that it was the original fountain of all the other dolors, except the third. That stands apart. It is Mary's own Crucifixion, her Gethsemane and her Calvary. But the two dolors which came out of the Infancy, and the four which represent the Passion, have the Crucifixion for their centre. The Three Days' loss does not belong to the Infancy, and the shadow of the Passion is no more thrown over it than it was over the whole life of Mary. It was the act of Jesus Himself, which seemingly had an especial relation to His Mother. The third dolor, which prefaces the Eighteen Years at Nazareth, was to her sorrows what the Eighteen Years were to her life generally, something between Jesus and herself, a mystery of a different sphere from those in which both He and she were concerned in the fulfillment of the world's redemption. But the sword in Simeon's prophecy was the Crucifixion. The Flight into Egypt was to hinder the cruelty of Herod from anticipating the moment of our Saviour's death. The Meeting with the Cross was the road to Calvary. The Taking down from the Cross and the Burial were sorrows which flowed naturally out of the Crucifixion, and were in unbroken unity with it. The Crucifixion was therefore the realization of her lifelong woe. The fountain was reached. She had tracked it up to Calvary. What remained was the waste water, or rather the water and blood, which flowed down from the mount, and sank in at the threshold of the Garden Tomb. Compared with the Crucifixion, the other dolors, the third always excepted, were almost reliefs and distinctions stirring in the fixed depths of her unfathomable woe. The Crucifixion was a sorrow by itself, without name or likeness. It was the centre of the system of her dolors, while the independence of her third dolor betokens the existence of that vast world which Mary is in her own self, a creation apart, brighter than this world of ours, and more dear to Jesus. It is a mysterious orb allowed to come in sight of this other system, where we are,--a disclosure of all that world of phenomena which is hidden from our eyes in the Eighteen Years, during which Jesus devoted Himself to her. It ranks with the Immaculate Conception, the Incarnation, and the Assumption, all which belong to Mary's world, and would have been even if sin had not been, though they would have been different from what they were. But that third dolor shows how the fallen world of sin and the necessity of a passible Incarnation told on her world, as it did on His, and passed upon the lineaments of the Maternity as well as upon those of the Incarnation. There are certainly few mysteries in the gospel which we understand less than the Three Days' Loss.
Another peculiarity of the Crucifixion is the length of time during which the tide of suffering remained at its highest point without any sign of ebbing. The mysteries, which filled the three hours, seem too diversified for us to regard them, at least till we come to the Dereliction, as rising from less to greater in any graduated scale. They are rather separate elevations, of unequal height, standing linked together like a mountain-chain. But the lowest of them was so immensely high that it produced most immeasurable agony in her soul. The anguish of death is momentary. The length of some of the most terrific operations which can rack the human frame seldom exceeds a quarter of an hour. Pain pushed beyond a certain limit, as in medieval torture, is instantaneous death. In human punishments which are not meant to kill, the hand of science keeps watch on the pulse of the sufferer. But to Mary the Crucifixion was three hours, three long hours, of mortal agony, comprising hundreds of types and shapes of torture, each one of them intolerable in itself, each pushed beyond the limits of human endurance unless supported by miracle, and each of them kept at that superhuman pitch for all that length of time. When pain comes we wish to lie down unless madness and delirium come with it, or we are fain to run about, to writhe, gesticulate, and groan. Mary stood upright on her feet the whole while, leaning on no one, and not so much as an audible sigh accompanied her silent tears. It is difficult to take this thought in. We can only take it in by prayer, not by hearing or reading.
It was also a peculiarity of the Crucifixion that it was a heroic trial of her incomparable faith. Pretty nearly the faith of the whole world was in her when she stood, with John and Magdalen, at the foot of the Cross. There was hardly a particle of her belief which was not tried to the uttermost in that amazing scene. Naturally speaking, our Lord's Divinity was never so obscured. Supernaturally speaking, it was never so manifest. Could it be possible that the Incarnate Word should be subject to the excesses of such unparalleled indignities? Was the light within Him never to gleam out once? Was the Wisdom of the Father to be with blasphemous ridicule muffled in a white sack, and pulled about in absurd, undignified helplessness by the buffooning guards of an incestuous king? Was there not a point, or rather were there not many points, in the Passion, when the limit of what was venerable and fitting was overstepped? even in the reserved narrative of the Gospels, how many things there are which the mind cannot dwell on without being shocked and repulsed, as well as astonished! Even at this distance of time do they not try our faith by their very horror, make our blood run cold by their murderous atrocity, and tempt our devotion to withdraw, sick and fastidious, from the affectionate contemplation of the very prodigies of disgraceful cruelty, by which our own secret sins and shames were with such public shame most lovingly expiated? Is not devotion to the Passion to this day the touchstone of feeble faith, of lukewarm love, and of all self-indulgent penance? And Mary, more delicate and fastidious far than we, drank all these things with her eyes, and understood the horror of them in her soul, as we can never understand it. Think what faith was hers. (Father Frederick Faber, The Foot of the Cross, published originally in England in 1857 under the title of The Dolors of Mary, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 259-262.)
Despite the well-meaning Catholics today to do what many of us did in the past, all of the complaints made to the conciliarists in Rome about the "bad" "bishops" in this or that country, including the United States of America, will come to just as much now as in the past: nothing. Conciliarism is the problem, not "bad" bishops, who have been appointed by the conciliar "popes" and who have been maintained in their positions despite exceeding even the very flexible boundaries of "acceptable" beliefs its counterfeit church sanctions "officially." There is no more gain to be had by fighting the "bad" bishops by this or that petition drive than there is to fight the "bad" politicians by various naturalistic means as each of these "bad" categories of people are the logical fruit of a world which denies the Social Reign of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen.
We must, therefore, have the steadfast Faith of Our Lady as she stood so valiantly beneath the foot of the Cross of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. We must keep her--and all of the angels and the saints, including her Most Chaste Spouse, Saint Joseph--company at the foot of the Cross as frequently as we can as we assist at true offerings of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition offered by true priests in the Catholic catacombs where absolutely no concessions are made to conciliarism or to the nonexistent legitimacy of its false shepherds.
The final victory belongs to the Immaculate of Mary. May we, as the consecrated slaves of that Immaculate Heart, offer to the Most Sacred Heart of her Divine Son all of our prayers and sufferings and sacrifices and penances and mortifications and fastings and humiliations in reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit. This will not make us popular or "successful" in the world. However, a steadfast adherence to--and a public confession of--the rights of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen might help us to plant a few seeds for the restoration of the Church in all of her glory and thus of these sacred rights for the good of men and their nations.
The path is simple: the Cross, at which stood the Mother of the Divine Redeemer. Should not we follow this path each and every day without complaint and with a heart that takes refuge in the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate of Mary? The reward is nothing less than an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise if we persist until the points of our dying breaths in states of Sanctifying Grace.
What are we waiting for?