Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
July 14, 2010

Chastisements Under Which We Must Save Our Souls

Part Two

by Thomas A. Droleskey

As one who will turn sixty years of age in four hundred ninety-eight days, please God and by Our Lady's prayers that my physical life is sustained until then, I know, as mentioned briefly in the first part of this three-part series, that some of my short-term memory is slipping. I am doing such dyslexic things now as typing such things as "Map of Saint Louis, Illinois" into a search engine to help a friend of ours who is moving to Saint Louis to find what I know to be some decent, affordable communities to live. I just could not think of the names of some communities (Kirkwood, Chesterfield) that I have drive through many, many times. This is a little disturbing as it is more than just fatigue. This is in all in God's Holy Providence and I accept it as such, which is why correspondents who write to me should not be surprised if I do not retain a single thing of what they have written to me--or even that they have written to me--as I am having difficulty now even retaining that kind of short-term knowledge.

Oh, yes, just by the way, I do know full well, after been to the city named after Saint Louis IX, King of France, that Saint Louis is located along the banks of the mighty Mississippi River in eastern Missouri, the state of my late mother's birth (in Kansas City, Missouri, not Kansas City, Kansas) on March 6, 1921. Those momentary lapses and real mental blocks are something that I have never experienced on an almost daily basis. This could be a normal part of the aging process, which is, more accurately, the dying process, or it could be the signs of something a bit more degenerative. Time (and continued loss of memory!) will tell.

That having been noted, however, my long term memory is still fairly decent. And it the use of that long term memory that causes me a bit of frustration as news stories with supposedly "new" news excite the multitudes. This phenomenon is to be found in the midst of the world as "new" efforts to curb "America's dependence on fossil fuels" are launched as as "new" efforts are proposed to deal with "epidemics" of various diseases that be contracted, save for instances of transmission by direct contact with infected blood or by means of a blood transfusion or some exchange of bodily fluids (as happened with Kimberly Bergalis, who died on December 8, 1991, of a certain infectious disease that she received as a "gift" from a dentist, Dr. David Acer, who was a practitioner of perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments and was infected with the disease, which took his life on September 3, 1990), by committing sins, whether natural or unnatural, against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

The reigning caesar ignoramus here in the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, has just announced a new "initiative" to fight the disease that took the like of Kimberly Bergalis (as well as professional tennis player Arthur Ashe, who contracted the disease as a result of a blood transfusion and died from it on February 6, 1943) that will require the spending of more billions upon billions of dollars and more insidious "education" programs designed to indemnify people from suffering the physical, bodily consequences of their sins, consequences that were described by Saint Paul as follows in his Epistle to the Romans:

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. [27] And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. [28] And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; [29] Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, [30] Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

[31] Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. [32] Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. (Romans 1: 26-32.)


"But they also consent to them that do them." Indeed, Saint Paul. Indeed.

How is it possible for the ignorant leaders of the world, such as Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus, to accept this truth when the man whom all but a tiny, tiny fraction of Catholics, many of whom shoot at each other much more than they bother to oppose the errors of conciliarism or of Modernity, accept as the Vicar of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ continues--as in continues what he as done since he began his reign on April 20, 2005--to appoint men as "bishops" of what most people in the world believe to be the Catholic Church.who do indeed consent to perverse sins against nature.

These "bishops" appointed by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and who promote "educational" and "health" programs that make it appear as though it is impossible to observe the binding precepts of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments in cooperation with the Sanctifying Graces won for us by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood for us in atonement for our sins and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

These "bishops" believe that people are going to sin against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments and that they need "information" about "preventative measures" to "protect" their bodily life while they offend God grievously and commit spiritual suicide by killing the life of Sanctifying Grace within their immoral souls.

These "bishops" believe that children as young as those in Kindergarten "need" the same kind of "information" to equip themselves to make "choices" about their future behavior even those this information is designed to break down their natural psychological and emotional resistance to such information and to prepare them to live lives of wanton sin in the assurance that "God" loves them no matter what they do or what they believe or how they act.

These 'bishops" believe that is is necessary to deform the souls of children and all others into accepting perverse sins against nature so that they, too, can "consent to them that do them" if not commit such sins themselves. Getting everyone to accept the "rainbow agenda" under the slogans of "diversity" and "compassion" and "equal rights" and "tolerance" is the chief goal of the "bishops" appointed by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI who are open, full-throated, unapologetic supporters of sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.

Consider this report written by Dr. Marian Therese Horvat, who opposes sedevacantism and accepts Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI as the "pope:"

Benedict XVI has named Msgr. Robert W. McElroy to be an Auxiliary Bishop in the Archdiocese of San Francisco. The appointment was announced at the Vatican and concurrently in Washington, D.C. by Papal Nuncio Archbishop Pietro Sambi.

It is a happy moment for progressivists who were becoming concerned that this Pope might be moving a bit to the right. Columns in America and National Catholic Reporter have already applauded the appointment of the 56-year-old native San Franciscan who was ordained in 1980. Well, indeed they should, since McElroy receives high scores on their report cards on the burning issues of the day. I offer some examples:

  • By their own admittance, Msgr. McElroy is friendly and compromising on homosexuality. I will return to this topic shortly.
  • In a 2005 article in America magazine, he openly opposed refusing Communion to or – don’t even think about it! – the excommunication of Catholic politicians who support abortion. A discipline like this would make the Church appear too ‘partisan,’ ‘Republican’ and ‘coercive,’ he argues.
  • In another article, he championed John Courtney Murray – who played a pivotal role in drafting Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom – as “the most significant Catholic theologian the U.S. ever produced.”


In short, the new auxiliary Bishop should not rock any boats in the notoriously progressivist and liberal San Francisco Archdiocese (home of Holy Redeemers Parish here, here and here). A native San Franciscan, he is one ‘of their own’ – nurtured and placed in important posts and parishes by progressivist Archbishops John Quinn and William Levada.

Friendly on homosexuality

San Francisco is an important Archdiocese, with its 437,000 Catholics and 457 priests, 79 permanent deacons, and 931 religious. Unfortunately, its progressivist approach and tolerance policy toward homosexuals have made it a symbolic bastion for the ‘left’ since the early 1980s. Under Archbishop John Quinn it was among the first to open its doors to Dignity ministries and host an openly ‘gay-friendly’ parish, Holy Redeemer Redeemer (MHR) Catholic Church, a parish that boasts today its open same-sex “married” Eucharistic ministers.

In 1992, Quinn made headlines for openly opposing the (very moderate) Vatican document that declared homosexuals and lesbians do not have the same civil rights as heterosexuals. The document, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), stated it is morally acceptable to discriminate against homosexuals in public housing, the adoption of children and in certain types of employment such as teaching.

It was Fr. Robert McElroy, speaking in the name of the Archdiocese, who announced that despite the Vatican position, “there would be no change in policy regarding discrimination against homosexuals” in the San Francisco Archdiocese. He explained the defiance by noting that the CDF document was only “advisory” and not “binding.” (1)

Then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the CDF, made no reprisals for this stance of open defiance to his document or correction to McElroy’s interpretation.

McElroy’s name appeared again in the news in 2006 as one of the ‘moral theologians’ who managed to find a comfortable compromise position for the Archdiocese regarding arranging adoptions for same-sex ‘couples.’

When the Archdiocese was instructed by the CDF to end its policy of placing children for adoption in same-sex homosexual households, Msgr. McElroy helped find the solution: San Francisco Catholic Charities would no longer supervise “direct placement” of adopted children to anyone. Instead, it would send staff members and funding to an organization - Family Builders by Adoption - that helped “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples” adopt children .(2) For the next two years, Catholic Charities provided close to $250,000 each year for two of its staff to assist with adoptions at Family Builders.

Msgr. McElroy, already known for his ‘elastic’ views on homosexuals issues, thus stretched the boundaries of the CDF directive to accommodate those who want to adopt children… The website Queerty.com, a "gay blog for the queer community," hailed the new partnership as a "brilliant answer to a needless problem."

After that action, Fr. McElroy was criticized by conservatives as being “out of line with the Vatican.” (3) Since there has been no indication his position has changed on this issue, I wonder how those conservatives will reconcile the fact that today the Vatican has rewarded the dissident pastor and theologian, elevating him to become an Auxiliary Bishop of San Francisco?

Don’t rock the boat

One of the lines of defense the Vatican has adopted against the rolling scandal of pedophile priests and its correspondent cover-up by Bishops is to cite experts affirming that clergy pedophilia is a consequence of the general homosexual tendency present everywhere.

I agree that homosexuals and pedophile priests would both have the same tendencies and sin against nature. But what I do not understand is how the Vatican would choose a homosexual-friendly Bishop for San Francisco. Isn’t the Vatican promoting both vices at the same time? Wouldn't the San Francisco Archdiocese be a first focus point in the United States to establish Bishops who would employ corrective and disciplinary measures?

If the Pope truly wants to stem pedophilia in the Church, he should reward men who show no spirit of compromise on ‘gay’ marriage and homosexual ministries. If he wants to reform corrupt dioceses – like the Archdiocese of San Francisco, he should not reward clergy – like Msgr. McElroy – who have openly supported homosexuality.  (Pope Appoints Gay-Friendly Bishop to San Francisco .)


Unfortunately, of course, the "pope" is oblivious to the horror of personal sin. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is, after all, the man who has committed one Mortal Sin, objectively speaking, after another, by personally esteeming the symbols of false religions with his own priestly hands, by entering into places of false worship and treating Protestant "clergy" and Talmudic rabbis and Mohammedan imams as having a "mission" from the true God of Divine Revelation to fight the "irreligion" extant in our day, by terming places of false worship as "jewels" and "sacred," and by saying repeatedly that false religions can work together with the Catholic Faith to build "peace" in the world by means of their "coexistence" and "tolerance."

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has no concept of the horror of personal sin, which is why he himself sat at that meeting in Munich, Federal Republic of Germany, on January 15, 1980, and either listened impassively or actually approved of the transfer of the a known priest-abuser, Father Peter Hullermann, to a parish in his own Archdiocese of Munich and Freising (see "Fall Guys" Aren't Usually "Stand-Up Guys"). And it is why he said nothing when a French "bishop," Pierre Rican of the Diocese of Bayeux-Lisieux, was congratulated by the then prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Clergy, Dario Cardinal "Castrillon" Hoyos, for not reported a perverted "priest" who had abused a boy to the secular authorities, something that stands quite in contrast with the firmness of Pope Saint Pius V, who knew that men who commit such sins had no place in public ever again (please see Dario Castrillon Hoyos, Meet Pope Saint Pius V).

It makes perfect sense, therefore, for Ratzinger/Benedict to be so sanguine about close protégés of his own trusted protégés, William "Cardinal" Levada, the prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, such as Robert W. McElroy and to be "outraged" as the secular authorities as the secular authorities seek in Belgium and elsewhere seek to bring to justice alleged "bishops" who have covered-up civil crimes that involve the moral corruption of the young and others that they have indemnified and been entirely indifferent to even after reports documenting the abuse were brought to their attention time and time and time again.

The "brotherhood" of "bishops" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism believed that it had to protect itself even though they were covering up and in some cases actually committing themselves scandalous, heinous crimes against God and men as they sought to browbeat and intimidate anyone and everyone who dared to bring their concerns to them. Should it surprise the "great defender of tradition" who is so sanguine about esteeming the symbols of false religions and treating non-Catholic "clergy" as though they have a mission to serve souls that actually pleases God that that God will  not be mocked and that He might choose instruments of chastisement from the secular world to bring to their knees haughty, arrogant, proud, insolent and unrepentantly sinful men who have long considered themselves to be above every civil law and even the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.


After all, why should Barack Hussein Obama or any other lord of Modernity understand that chastity pursued in cooperation with Sanctifying Grace and with true sorrow for any sins of word, thought or deed that one has committed against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments is the only way to avoid most contact with certain infamous infectious diseases that now carry with them a badge of "victimology" when some of the lords of conciliarism can speak only in defiance of the natural moral law without any kind of "papal" sanction whatsoever? Consider this report from 2004:

BRUSSELS - Belgium's leading Catholic clergyman has declared that he is not opposed to the use of condoms in the fight against AIDS, in a declaration which was likely to anger Pope John Paul II.

During an interview on Dutch television, Cardinal Godfried Daneels, who is Primate of the Catholic Church in Belgium, said he believed wearing a condom was acceptable in certain circumstances.

"When an HIV positive man says to his partner, 'I want to have sexual relations', then he should wear a condom," the Cardinal said.

The Cardinal qualified his comments by saying that ideally such sexual relations should not take place and that HIV positive people should try to remain celibate.

"But if relations do take place," he insisted "a person must respect the commandment that condemns murder in preference to the one that forbids adultery," he added.

The Cardinal argued that using a condom to prevent illness or death could not be judged morally in the same way as using one as a method of birth control.

His comments are likely to bring him into direct confrontation with the Roman Catholic hierarchy however.

Pope John Paul II has made it clear on numerous occasions that he is opposed to contraception in any circumstances, a stance that has earned him widespread criticism among those campaigning against the spread of AIDS.

But the current Pope is seriously ill and some analysts say Daneels' comments may suggest that more progressive Catholics are already starting to consider what direction the Church will take when a new pontiff is appointed. (Top Catholic backs prophylactics.)


It is never permissible to commit one sin deliberately in order to avoid suffering from the consequences of that sin. There are no "protective" measures authorized by God to prevent one from contracting certain infectious diseases other than a chaste life, and that is made possible by the graces He won for us on the wood of the Holy Cross. It is that simple.

"Cardinal" Danneels was not reprimanded by the largely incapacitated Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II. "Cardinal" Danneels was left to retire cum magna gloria by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on January 18, 2010, a full nineteen months, fourteen days after he had reached the mandatory retirement age in the conciliar structures of seventy-five. Is it any wonder that new revelations show that Godfried "Cardinal" Danneels, who once said in a New York Times Magazine article in 1994 that he could never deny what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service to those he knew to be divorced and remarried without a conciliar decree of nullity, has been knowingly complicit in the protection of perverted clergymen in the conciliar structures?

BRUSSELS, July 13, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In the week following the deposition of Cardinal Godfried Danneels, allegations that he knew of and ignored decades of sexual abuse of young people by his priests have begun to appear in the Belgian papers.

Police raided the offices of the Archdiocese of Brussels and Danneels’s home early this month. Shortly thereafter, on July 6, Danneels spent a grueling ten hour day answering questions from Brussels prosecutors about the extent of his knowledge and involvement in the cover-up of sexual abuse by priests on his 27-year watch as head of the Brussels diocese and primate of the Belgian Catholic Church.

Local news reports say that during the interrogation, Danneels denied all knowledge of sexual abuse by priests. But in the following week, reports have begun to surface from purported victims and their families who insist that Danneels had known for years of extensive clerical sex abuse among his priests.

According to the Flemish press, Danneels was being questioned as a witness, not as a suspect. But later Jos Colpin, spokesman for the Brussels public prosecutor, said he would not rule out the possibility that Danneels would ultimately face charges. “[I]f this occurs,” he said, “in any case of this magnitude, it will take place at the end of the investigation.”

If it is shown that Danneels knew about the abuse of minors while it was still occurring, he could be charged with gross negligence for failing to give “appropriate assistance” to someone who was in immediate and imminent danger.

The raids and the questioning of the popular Danneels has created a frenzy in the Belgian press. In the days following the raids, the Belgian news service Het Laatste Nieuws reported that photographs pertaining to the notorious Dutroux pedophile/murder case were found among the material seized by police. On July 7, the Belgian bishops conference confirmed that the documents had been found in the archbishop's house in Mechelen but said that they had been delivered to the new archbishop of Brussels, Andre Leonard, by an un-named “third party well known to the media and the Archdiocese.”

Peter Adriaenssens, the chairman of the now dissolved Church commission on sex abuse, was questioned on the same day as Danneels. He has admitted that of the 475 case files the commission received, 50 implicate the cardinal in knowledge of clerical sex abuse.

On July 9, the daily Le Soir revealed the story of a priest who says he was abused by a priest since his days as an altar boy, and then “coldly” abandoned by the Church. The priest, who was not named and is now in his 40s, told Le Soir that his godmother wrote to Cardinal Danneels about the abuse but received only a form letter response from a secretary.

At the same time, officials are investigating further complaints against the former bishop of Bruges, Roger Vangheluwe, a close friend of Danneels, who resigned in April after admitting to having sexually abused his own nephew for years. Attorney Jean-Marie Berkvens told media on Friday, “We are investigating whether the former bishop can be prosecuted for ignoring years of complaints about sexual abuse in his diocese. The name of Cardinal Danneels also comes up.”

Jean Marc Meilleur of the Brussels Prosecutors Office told media that the raids had been carried out after new allegations of sex abuse and cover-ups had been forwarded to officials. The extraordinary nature of the searches, during which police drilled holes into the tombs of deceased former bishops, indicates that police expected that Church officials had attempted to hide evidence.

Danneels, who was once called the “incarnation” of the Belgian Catholic Church by the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, is said to be “in shock” by this investigation. During his time in office, he gained immense popularity among the elites of Brussels, the EU and the media by publicly opposing and questioning Catholic teaching on sexual issues including homosexuality and contraception. (More Sex Abuse Allegations Emerge after Belgian Cardinal’s Interrogation; see also Touchy Touchy).


Then again, of course, practically no "bishop" in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism gets disciplined or reprimanded publicly unless they admit to having engaged in "improper" conduct. It has been (here we go again, folks) four hundred sixty days since the conciliar "archbishop" of Freiburg-Breisgau and the president of the conciliar "bishops'" conference in Germany, Robert Zollitsch, denied in a television interview that was aired on Holy Saturday, April 11, 2009, that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died in atonement for our sins on the wood of the Holy Cross. What has happened to him since then? has the "pope" taken any action against him? Has his heresy been corrected by the "pope." No. This is the same "pope" who has thus far taken no action against the "good stand" of  "Father" Raymond Gravel, a pro-abortion, pro-perversity presbyter in the Archdiocese of Quebec who has promoted evil under the cover of the civil law and is even an admitted practitioner of perversity on a paid basis (!) while a member of the Canadian Parliament (see Pro-Death Quebec Priest Slams LifeSiteNews in Major Media Outlets).

Then again, of course, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has gone so far as to state that those "theologians" who deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ still "continue believing in a Christian manner:"

Up to the very end of his conference, Card. Ratzinger resolutely continues on this road of agnosticism and now logically comes to the most disastrous of conclusions. He writes:

In conclusion, as we contemplate our present-day religious situation, of which I have tried to throw some light on some of its elements, we may well marvel at the fact that, after all, people still continue believing in a Christian manner, not only according to Hick's, Knitter's as well as others' substitute ways or forms, but also according to that full and joyous Faith found in the New Testament of the Church of all time.


So, there it is: For Card. Ratzinger, "Hick, Knitter, and others" who deny the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, His Church, His sacraments, and, in short, all of Christianity, continue "despite everything" "believing in a Christian manner," even though they do so using "substitute forms of belief"! Here, the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith leaves us wondering indeed, just what it is he means by "believing in a Christian manner."

Moreover, once the "preambula fidei" have been eliminated, that "full and joyous Faith of the Church of all time" which seems [for Card. Ratzinger] to be no different from modern-day apostasies other than by its style and total character, is utterly lacking in any rational credibility in comparison with and in relation to what he refers to as "substitute ways or forms" of faith. "How is it," Card. Ratzinger wonders, "in fact, that the Faith [the one of all time] still has a chance of success?" Answer:

I would say that it is because it finds a correspondence in man's nature…..There is, in man, an insatiable desire for the infinite. None of the answers we have sought is sufficient [but must we take his own word for it, or must we go through the exercise of experiencing all religions?]. God alone [but Whom, according to Card. Ratzinger, human reason cannot prove to be truly God], Who made Himself finite in order to shatter the bonds of our own finitude and bring us to the dimension of His infinity [...and not to redeem us from the slavery of sin?] is able to meet all the needs of our human existence.


According to this, it is therefore not objective motives based on history and reason, and thus the truth of Christianity, but only a subjective appreciation which brings us to "see" that it [Christianity] is able to satisfy the profound needs of human nature and which would explain the "success" [modernists would say the "vitality"] of the "faith" ["of all time" or in its "substitute forms," it is of but little importance]. Such, however, is not at all Catholic doctrine: this is simply modernist apologetics (cf. Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi), based on their affirmed impossibility of grasping metaphysical knowledge (or agnosticism or skepticism), which Card. Ratzinger seemed to want to shun in the first part of his address.

Now we are in a position to better understand why Card. Ratzinger has such a wide-open concept of "theology" and of "faith" that he includes everything: theology as well as heresies, faith and apostasy. On that road of denial of the human reason's ability of attaining metaphysical knowledge, a road which he continues to follow, he lacks the "means of discerning the difference between faith and non-faith" (R. Amerio, op. cit., p.340) and, consequently, theology from pseudo-theology, truth from heresy:

All theologies are nullified, because all are regarded as equivalent; the heart or kernel of religion is located in feelings or experiences, as the Modernists held at the beginning of this century (Amerio, op. cit., p.542).


We cannot see how this position of Card. Ratzinger can escape that solemn condemnation proclaimed at Vatican I: "If anyone says...that men must be brought to the Faith solely by their own personal interior experience...let him be anathema" (DB 1812). (Cardinal Ratzinger. This article, by the way, appeared in a publication of the Society of Saint Pius X, Si, Si, No, No in January of 1998.)


By what stretch of rationality can we expect the likes of Barack Hussein Obama to know about moral truths, no less supernatural truths, when the conciliar "pope" believes that outright theological error can help us to "know" more about God and as he enables the conciliar "bishops" who are either active practitioners of perversity or morally blind as to its inherent evils?

Why shouldn't Barack Hussein Obama believe that spending more billions of dollars will help "prevent" the spread of certain infections diseases contracted principally as a result sins, both natural and perverse against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments and sins against the Fifth Commandment (mutilation of one's body by the use of "shared needles" to inject various hallucinogenic drugs into it )rather than understand that it is the amendment of one's moral life in cooperation with Sanctifying Grace that can stop the spread of these diseases when conciliar presbyters and "bishops" and "cardinals" speak as Godfried Danneels has done without being reprimanded by a "pope" who is ostensibly opposed to their "ideas"?

How can one criticize a school district in Montana for seeking to implement explicit programs in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments from Kindergarten through twelfth grade when such programs are, at least in some form or another, used in almost every conciliar school and religious education program in the western world in full violation of Pope Pius XI's direct prohibition of such classroom instruction contained in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

Another very grave danger is that naturalism which nowadays invades the field of education in that most delicate matter of purity of morals. Far too common is the error of those who with dangerous assurance and under an ugly term propagate a so-called sex-education, falsely imagining they can forearm youths against the dangers of sensuality by means purely natural, such as a foolhardy initiation and precautionary instruction for all indiscriminately, even in public; and, worse still, by exposing them at an early age to the occasions, in order to accustom them, so it is argued, and as it were to harden them against such dangers.

Such persons grievously err in refusing to recognize the inborn weakness of human nature, and the law of which the Apostle speaks, fighting against the law of the mind; and also in ignoring the experience of facts, from which it is clear that, particularly in young people, evil practices are the effect not so much of ignorance of intellect as of weakness of a will exposed to dangerous occasions, and unsupported by the means of grace.

In this extremely delicate matter, if, all things considered, some private instruction is found necessary and opportune, from those who hold from God the commission to teach and who have the grace of state, every precaution must be taken. Such precautions are well known in traditional Christian education, and are adequately described by [Silvio "Cardinal"] Antoniano [who lived in the Sixteenth Century] cited above, when he says:

Such is our misery and inclination to sin, that often in the very things considered to be remedies against sin, we find occasions for and inducements to sin itself. Hence it is of the highest importance that a good father, while discussing with his son a matter so delicate, should be well on his guard and not descend to details, nor refer to the various ways in which this infernal hydra destroys with its poison so large a portion of the world; otherwise it may happen that instead of extinguishing this fire, he unwittingly stirs or kindles it in the simple and tender heart of the child. Speaking generally, during the period of childhood it suffices to employ those remedies which produce the double effect of opening the door to the virtue of purity and closing the door upon vice.


Those in the State of Montana and elsewhere have a remedy to save their children from the sort of programs that are now in the news: take their children out of the public schools, which are insidious by their very nature as the civil state has no authority to establish schools or to impose a mandatory curriculum that must be followed in all schools, public and private (see America's Concentration Camps).

Those in the conciliar structures have a remedy to save their children from the programs that were condemned by Pope Pius XI: them them out of the conciliar schools and discharge their responsibilities under the Fourth Commandment to supervise directly the education of their children. The procreation and education of children do, after all, constitute the first and principal end of marriage, and parents have all of the graces available to them to discharge these responsibilities in order to protect their children from apostasy and error and moral corruption.

There is no need for hand wringing.

There is no need for protests or presentations at a public hearing before a public school board.

There is no need for petitions to be sent to the local chancery office or to the conciliar officials in Rome.

That most Catholics and non-Catholics do not see this in these starkly simple terms is the consequence, at least in very large measure, of the counterfeit church of conciliarism's immersion in the sort of naturalism that can only triumph more and more over time as the sacramental barrenness of the Protestant and Novus Ordo liturgical service and its other false rites lead men who purport to be "bishops" and "priests" to speak and to act exactly like Barack Hussein Obama and company, which is why so many of them are so sympathetic with him.

Today is the Feast of Saint Bonaventure, a son of Saint Francis of Assisi and a close friend of Saint Thomas Aquinas who shared with the Angelic Doctor a great, intense and burning love for Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in His Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament. May his holy intervention help us to remain steadfast in the unvarnished Catholic Faith by adhering to our true bishops and true priests in the catacombs who give no quarter to the conciliar "popes" who have proved themselves to be enemies of Christ the King and of the souls He redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood, adoring Our King in His Real Presence and consoling Him by means of our Rosaries offered to Him through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which will indeed triumph in the end.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!


Our Lady of Fatima, 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 Bonaventure, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

© Copyright 2010, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.