Dressed to Kill
Thomas A. Droleskey
Although an article of mine with this title appeared in The Wanderer about twenty years ago now, its text long ago disappeared into the black hole of various computer crashes, and I do not think that my former colleagues at 201 Ohio Avenue in Saint Paul, Minnesota, are about to send me a copy. Thus is it that I present for your consideration a new composition on the subject of outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta's proposal to remove the remaining de jure restrictions on women serving in combat roles in the armed forces of the United States of America even though they have been doing so on a de facto basis in Iraq and Afghanistan since former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton permitted women to serve in some combat roles in 1994.
Here is a story about this entirely unsurprising development in our brave new world that has been formed as a result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and the subsequent rise of the nationalistic ideologies and "philosophies" that comprise Judeo-Masonry, a brave new world that is now in its final stages of perfecting Antichrist's totalitarian rule as the wellsprings of grace have dried up in the aftermath of the sacramentally barren liturgical rites of conciliarism:
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is lifting the military’s official ban on women in combat, which will open up hundreds of thousands of additional front-line jobs to them, senior defense officials said Wednesday.
The groundbreaking decision overturns a 1994 Pentagon rule that restricts women from artillery, armor, infantry and other such combat roles, even though in reality women have frequently found themselves in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan; according to the Pentagon, hundreds of thousands of women have deployed in those conflicts. As of last year, more than 800 women had been wounded in the two wars and more than 130 had died.
Defense officials offered few details about Mr. Panetta’s decision but described it as the beginning of a process to allow the branches of the military to put the change into effect. Defense officials said Mr. Panetta had made the decision on the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Women have long chafed under the combat restrictions and have increasingly pressured the Pentagon to catch up with the reality on the battlefield. The move comes as Mr. Panetta is about to step down from his post and would leave him with a major legacy after only 18 months in the job.
The decision clearly fits into the broad and ambitious liberal agenda, especially around matters of equal opportunity, that President Obama laid out this week in his Inaugural Address. But while it had to have been approved by him, and does not require action by Congress, it appeared Wednesday that it was in large part driven by the military itself. Some midlevel White House staff members were caught by surprise by the decision, indicating that it had not gone through an extensive review there.
Mr. Panetta’s decision came after he received a Jan. 9 letter from Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who stated in strong terms that the armed service chiefs all agreed that “the time has come to rescind the direct combat exclusion rule for women and to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service.”
A military official said the change would be implemented “as quickly as possible,” although the Pentagon is allowing three years, until January 2016, for final decisions from the services.
Each branch of the military will have to come up with an implementation plan in the next several months, the official said. If a branch of the military decides that a specific job should not be opened to a woman, representatives of that branch will have to ask the defense secretary for an exception.
“To implement these initiatives successfully and without sacrificing our war-fighting capability or the trust of the American people, we will need time to get it right,” General Dempsey wrote.
It will be carried out during what the administration describes as the end of the American combat role in Afghanistan, the nation’s longest war.
A copy of General Dempsey’s letter was provided by a Pentagon official under the condition of anonymity.
The letter noted that this action was meant to ensure that women as well as men “are given the opportunity to succeed.”
It was unclear why the Joint Chiefs acted now after examining the issue for years, although in recent months there has been building pressure from high-profile lawsuits.
In November 2012 the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging the ban on behalf of four service women and the Service Women’s Action Network, a group that works for equality in the military. The A.C.L.U. said that one of the plaintiffs, Maj. Mary Jennings Hegar, an Air National Guard helicopter pilot, was shot down, returned fire and was wounded while on the ground in Afghanistan, but could not seek combat leadership positions because the Defense Department did not officially acknowledge her experience as combat.
In the military, serving in combat positions like the infantry remains crucial to career advancement. Women have long said that by not recognizing their real service, the military has unfairly held them back.
The A.C.L.U. embraced Mr. Panetta’s decision with cautious optimism. Ariela Migdal, an attorney with the A.C.L.U.'s Women’s Rights Project, said in a statement that the organization was “thrilled” by the decision, but added that she hoped it would be implemented “fairly and quickly.”
By law Mr. Panetta is able to lift the ban as a regulatory decision, although he must give Congress a 30-day notice of his intent. Congress does not need to approve the decision before it goes into effect. If Congress disagrees with the action, members would have to pass new legislation prohibiting the change, which appeared highly unlikely.
Although in the past some Republican members of the House have balked at allowing women in combat, on Wednesday there appeared to be bipartisan endorsement for the decision, which was first reported by The Associated Press and CNN in midafternoon.
“It reflects the reality of 21st century military operations,” Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement.
Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington and the chairwoman of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, called it a “historic step for recognizing the role women have, and will continue to play, in the defense of our nation.”
Senator Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican and a member of the Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that she was pleased by the decision and said that it “reflects the increasing role that female service members play in securing our country.”
Representative Loretta Sanchez, the California Democrat who has long pressed to have women’s role in combat recognized, said that she was pleased that Mr. Panetta was removing what she called “the archaic combat exclusion policy.”
Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand, a New York Democrat who has pushed for lifting the ban, called it “a proud day for our country” and an important step in recognizing “the brave women who are already fighting and dying.”
But the leadership of a conservative Christian group, the Family Research Council, immediately weighed in with its opposition, sending out a statement from Jerry Boykin, a retired three-star general with a long career in Special Operations Forces.
General Boykin said that “the people making this decision are doing so as part of another social experiment.” He especially criticized the concept of placing women into Special Forces units where “living conditions are primal in many situations with no privacy for personal hygiene or normal functions.” It remains unclear if women will be permitted to fight in Special Forces and other commando units.
Public opinion polls show that Americans generally agree with lifting the ban. A nationwide Quinnipiac University poll conducted a year ago found that three-quarters of voters surveyed favored allowing military women to serve in units that engaged in close combat, if the women wanted to.
Policy experts who have pushed the military to lift the ban said that it was striking that much of the impetus appeared to come from Joint Chiefs, indicating that the top military leadership saw that the time had come to open up to women.
“It’s significant that the change came from the uniformed side, rather than being forced on the uniformed side by the civilian leadership,” said Greg Jacob, the policy director of the Service Women’s Action Network.
Under current rules, a number of military positions are closed to women — and to open them, the services have to change the rules.
Under Mr. Panetta’s new initiative, the situation is the opposite: Those combat positions would be open to women, and they could only be closed through specific action.
Capt. Emily Naslund, a Marine officer who saw ground combat in Afghanistan in 2010, said Wednesday that she embraced the decision. “This is awesome,” she said. (Pentagon Is Set to Lift Combat Ban for Women.)
Yes, this is "awesome," all right.
This is awesome when one considers how complete the feminism brought to rebirth as a result of the French and Bolshevik Revolutions has become. Yes, we are eyewitnesses to a socialist revolution taking place under the direction of a "pro-life" "conservative" presidential administration.
This is awesome one considers how women, noting celebrated exceptions made by God Himself in the case of Saint Joan of Arc and others as circumstances and Catholic prudence have required, have been transformed by the twin, interrelated revolutions of Modernity and Modernism into the very anthesis of the the humility and tender, nurturing, maternal love of Our Lady, she who is the model of true femininity, as they have desired "equality" with men.
So many women in the world have been transformed into mutations of men as they dress in a masculine manner, act and speak aggressively, if not profanely, and as they seek positions of "power" in the world of business, banking, law, politics, education, commerce, entertainment and sports, all to "prove" that there is no "glass ceiling," that they are "as good as men."
Lost in all of this prideful egalitarian self-seeking is the simple fact that the most "empowered" women who ever lived is the fairest flower of our race, Our Lady, she who was conceived without any stain of Original or Actual Sin, she who was filled with grace from the first moment of her Immaculate Conception in the womb of mother, our Good Saint Anne.
Our Lady did not vie for "equality" with her father, Saint Joachim.
Our Lady did not vie for "equality" with her humble, Most Chaste Spouse, our Good Saint Joseph, the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the Faithful. Although his superior in the Order of Redemption (Order of Grace), Our Lady was his inferior in the Order of Creation (Order of Nature). She willingly submitted to him as the head of the Holy Family.
Not so the "modern" women of contemporary feminism.
The "modern" women of contemporary feminism have been taught to "fulfill" themselves.
The "modern" women of contemporary feminism have been taught that they are not and cannot be "fulfilled" unless the hold the same positions as men and wield the same supposed "power" that they do.
In order to achieve this "equality," it was, of course, necessary to abandon child bearing, whether by means of contraceptive devices or pills or by the surgical dismemberment of the very fruit of their wombs, in order to take their "rightful" place in the halls of commerce, politics, banking and the media.
Women have been taught to dress immodestly and suggestively. "Dressed to kill" is what such attire is called. Women who are "dressed to kill" and care only about personal pleasure and satisfaction have by the millions learned how to kill their babies.
Now, of course, women in the United States of America have broken through the "glass ceiling" of the final de jure barriers in order to take their "place at the barricades." They are now dressed to kill, sometimes separated from their families and placed at all times in situations where temptations, whether natural or unnatural, against the Holy Virtue of Purity, as members of the armed forces of the United States of America.
Although what follows will anger considerably those attached to the
naturalist ideology of "conservatism," the plain fact of the matter is
that it was none other than Vladimir I. Lenin who wanted to see women,
including those with young children at home, take their place as equals
with men in the realm of civil governance. To be sure, this was
certainly a goal of the French Revolution. It was, however,
institutionalized by the Bolshevik Revolution and popularized by its
naturalistic, anti-Incarnational agents throughout the Western world,
including the United States of America:
The second anniversary of the Soviet power is a
fitting occasion for us to review what has, in general, been
accomplished during this period, and to probe into the significance and
aims of the revolution which we accomplished.
The bourgeoisie and its supporters accuse us of
violating democracy. We maintain that the Soviet revolution has given an
unprecedented stimulus to the development of democracy both in depth
and breadth, of democracy, moreover, distinctly for the toiling masses,
who had been oppressed under capitalism; consequently, of democracy for
the vast majority of the people, of socialist democracy (for the
toilers) as distinguished from bourgeois democracy (for the exploiters,
the capitalists, the rich).
Who is right?
To probe deeply into this question and to
understand it well will mean studying the experience of these two years
and being better prepared to further follow up this experience.
The position of women furnishes a particularly
graphic elucidation of the difference between bourgeois and socialist
democracy, it furnishes a particularly graphic answer to the question
In no bourgeois republic (i.e., where
there is private ownership of the land, factories, works, shares, etc.),
be it even the most democratic republic, nowhere in the world, not even
in the most advanced country, have women gained a position of complete
equality. And this, notwithstanding the fact that more than one and a
quarter centuries have elapsed since the Great French
In words, bourgeois democracy promises
equality and liberty. In fact, not a single bourgeois republic, not even
the most advanced one, has given the feminine half of the human race
either full legal equality with men or freedom from the guardianship and
oppression of men.
Bourgeois democracy is democracy of
pompous phrases, solemn words, exuberant promises and the high-sounding
slogans of freedom and equality. But, in fact, it screens the
non-freedom and inferiority of women, the non-freedom and inferiority of
the toilers and exploited.
Soviet, or socialist, democracy sweeps
aside the pompous, bullying, words, declares ruthless war on the
hypocrisy of the "democrats", the landlords, capitalists or well-fed
peasants who are making money by selling their surplus bread to hungry
workers at profiteering prices.
Down with this contemptible fraud! There
cannot be, nor is there nor will there ever be "equality" between the
oppressed and the oppressors, between the exploited and the exploiters.
There cannot be, nor is there nor will there ever be real "freedom" as
long as there is no freedom for women from the privileges which the law
grants to men, as long as there is no freedom for the workers from the
yoke of capital, and no freedom for the toiling peasants from the yoke
of the capitalists, landlords and merchants.
Let the liars and hypocrites, the dull-witted and
blind, the bourgeois and their supporters hoodwink the people with talk
about freedom in general, about equality in general, about democracy in
We say to the workers and peasants: Tear the masks from the faces of these liars, open the eyes of these blind ones. Ask them:
“Equality between what sex and what other sex?
“Between what nation and what other nation?
“Between what class and what other class?
“Freedom from what yoke, or from the yoke of what class? Freedom for what class?”
Whoever speaks of politics, of democracy,
of liberty, of equality, of socialism, and does not at the same time
ask these questions, does not put them in the foreground, does not fight
against concealing, hushing up and glossing over these questions, is
one of the worst enemies of the toilers, is a wolf in sheep's clothing,
is a bitter opponent of the workers and peasants, is a servant of the
landlords, tsars, capitalists.
In the course of two years Soviet power
in one of the most backward countries of Europe did more to emancipate
women and to make their status equal to that of the "strong" sex than
all the advanced, enlightened, "democratic" republics of the world did
in the course of 130 years.
Enlightenment, culture, civilisation,
liberty--in all capitalist, bourgeois republics of the world all these
fine words are combined with extremely infamous, disgustingly filthy and
brutally coarse laws in which woman is treated as an inferior being,
laws dealing with marriage rights and divorce, with the inferior status
of a child born out of wedlock as compared with that of a "legitimate"
child, laws granting privileges to men, laws that are humiliating and
insulting to women.
The yoke of capital, the tyranny of "sacred
private property", the despotism of philistine stupidity, the greed of
petty proprietors --these are the things that prevented the most
democratic bourgeois republics from infringing upon those filthy and
The Soviet Republic, the republic of workers and
peasants, promptly wiped out these laws and left not a stone in the
structure of bourgeois fraud and bourgeois hypocrisy.
Down with this fraud! Down with the liars who are
talking of freedom and equality for all, while there is an oppressed
sex, while there are oppressor classes, while there is private ownership
of capital, of shares, while there are the well-fed with their surplus
of bread who keep the hungry in bondage. Not freedom for all, not
equality for all, but a fight against the oppressors and exploiters, the
abolition of every possibility of oppression and exploitation-that is
Freedom and equality for the oppressed sex!
Freedom and equality for the workers, for the toiling peasants!
A fight against the oppressors, a fight against the capitalists, a fight against the profiteering kulaks!
That is our fighting slogan, that is our
proletarian truth, the truth of the struggle against capital, the truth
which we flung in the face of the world of capital with its honeyed,
hypocritical, pompous phrases about freedom and equality in general,
about freedom and equality for all.
And for the very reason that we have torn down
the mask of this hypocrisy, that we are introducing with revolutionary
energy freedom and equality for the oppressed and for the toilers,
against the oppressors, against the capitalists, against the kulaks--for
this very reason the Soviet government has become so dear to the hearts
of workers of the whole world.
It is for this very reason that, on the second
anniversary of the Soviet power, the: sympathies of the masses of the
workers, the sympathies of the oppressed and exploited in every country
of the world, are with us.
It is for this very
reason that, on this second anniversary of the Soviet power, despite
hunger and cold, despite all our tribulations, which have been caused by
the imperialists' invasion of the Russian Soviet Republic, we are full
of firm faith in the justice of our cause, of firm Faith in the
inevitable victory of Soviet power all over the world. (Soviet Power and the Status of Women)
Comrades, the elections to the Moscow Soviet show that the Party of the Communists is gaining strength among the working class.
It is essential that women workers take a
greater part in the elections. The Soviet government was the first and
only government in the world to abolish completely all the old,
bourgeois, infamous laws which placed women in an inferior position
compared with men and which granted privileges to men, as, for instance,
in the sphere of marriage laws or in the sphere of the legal attitude
to children. The Soviet government was the first and only government in
the world which, as a government of the toilers, abolished all the
privileges connected with property, which men retained in the family
laws of all bourgeois republics, even the most democratic.
Where there are landlords, capitalists and merchants, there can be no equality between women and men even in law.
Where there are no landlords, capitalists and
merchants, where the government of the toilers is building a new life
without these exploiters, there equality between women and men exists in
But that is not enough.
It is a far cry from equality in law to equality in life.
We want women workers to achieve equality
with men workers not only in law, but in life as well. For this, it is
essential that women workers take an ever increasing part in the
administration of public enterprises and in the administration of the
By engaging in the work of administration women will learn quickly and they will catch up with the men.
Therefore, elect more women workers, both
Communist and non-Party, to the Soviet. If she is only an honest woman
worker who is capable of managing work sensibly and conscientiously, it
makes no difference if she is not a member of the Party--elect her to
the Moscow Soviet.
Let there be more women workers in the Moscow
Soviet! Let the Moscow proletariat show that it is prepared to do and is
doing everything for the fight to victory, for the fight against the
old inequality, against the old, bourgeois, humiliation of women!
The proletariat cannot achieve complete freedom, unless it achieves complete freedom for women.
February 21, 1920 To the Working Women
The French Revolution had proclaimed the "liberation" of women from the
"shackles" of the past.
Contemporary feminism is but one expression of pride.
It is an aspect of the narcissistic selfism of Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
who once wrote that there was nothing more wonderful for him to
experience than his own visage in a mirror. Rousseau's radical
egalitarianism, which rejected all social distinctions based on nature
and function found in the Order of Creation and in the Order of
Redemption, helped to bring forth the French Revolution and its assault
upon all legitimately constituted authority in the Church and in the
world. Women were taught that their place was besides the men at the
barricades, that they were to be "liberated" from the responsibilities
of home and hearth, especially those of child-rearing.
The Bolshevik Revolution did the same, helping
to pave the way for the "Roaring Twenties" in the West as Talmudic
sympathizers of the Bolshevik Revolution produced motion pictures and
magazines designed to introduce Bolshevik standards as the basis of
undermining the role of men in society and to take women out of the home
so that their children would be trained from infancy through young
adulthood by the agents of all forms of naturalism (Judeo-Masonic and
Bolshevik in particular). Contemporary feminism is but an outgrowth of
the devil's efforts to replace Our Lady as the model of femininity with
that of the "Eve" of modernity, fully liberated from "man" and from God
We have let the Leninist program of feminism take such deep root in our
collective national psyche that anyone who dares point out the
revolutionary nature of upsetting the good order of the family so that
women with young children at home can run for elected office is
considered to be a "reactionary." It is "conservatives," therefore, who
have proved themselves to be most useful idiots in accepting the various
errors of Russia, including those of Vladimir I. Lenin, that have been
advanced very steadily by "conservative" presidential administrations.
Indeed, anyone who thinks that the hapless naturalists in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist "right" is going to oppose proposal made b the pro-abortion Catholic named Leon Edward Panetta, who was recently praised by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI for "helping to protect the world" (see Forty Years Of Emboldening, Appeasing And Enabling Killers, part one), is not thinking too clearly.
No, the denizens of the "right" follow the election results and the polls. Seventy-five percent of the American public support lifting all remaining restrictions on women in military combat.
Sixty percent of Americans support the retention of the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, January 22, 1899.
Why not dress up women to kill in combat when so many of them are dressed to kill their own babies?
Perhaps even more to the point is that most Catholics attached to the structures fo the counterfeit church of conciliarism, having been thoroughly imbued with the ethos of feminism by virtue of "religious education" programs and propaganda from the pulpit and as women have invaded the sanctuary itself in order to "take their place" next to the "presider" at the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, serving as the extension of the hands of the presider as "altar servers," reading from the "lectionary" at the lectern an distributing what they think is Holy Communion. The conciliar "pope," who has sided with Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro on so many issues, and most of his "bishops" will have no problem with lifting all remaining legal restrictions on women in combat in the armed forces of the United States of America.
This proves yet again that we are undergoing quite a chastisement for
the failure of a true pope to consecrate Russia to Our Lady's Sorrowful
and Immaculate Heart with all of the world's true bishops as Our Lady
herself requested of Sister Lucia dos Santos in 1925 as a further
elaboration of what she had requested on July 13, 1917.
Pope Pius XI explained this in Divini Redemptoris, his encyclical letter on atheistic communism issued on March 19, 1937, two days after he issued his encyclical letter, Mit Brennender Sorge, condemning Nazi nationalism and racialism:
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. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)
Forcing women out of the family and into the sweatshops and the
factories was a goal of not only the French and Bolshevik Revolutions,
but also of the Industrial Revolution of Calvinist capitalism. Wives and
mothers whose husbands worked long hours in factories for substandard
wages were forced in many instances to go to work themselves in order to
supplement their husbands' meager incomes. This is what prompted Popes
Leo XIII and Pius XI to insist that the man, the principal breadwinner
of the family, to be paid a "living wage," that is, to be paid enough to
support their families without forcing their wives to abandon the home
and to enter unnecessarily into the work force. The living wage is not a
flat sum of money. Indeed, Holy Mother Church teaches that a just
employer will pay his employees a sum proportionate to the work that
they do and proportionate to the number of children with which he has
been blessed by God. (See the appendix below for Pope Pius XI's explication of this important point in Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931.)
Women, having become accustomed to "equality" in the Order of Creation (Order of Nature), are now celebrating their ability to lead and to serve in combat missions with full legal impunity as part of American military policy, aping not only the revolutionaries in France in 1789 or those in Russia in 1917 but, of course, the Zionist revolutionaries of the State of Israel, who have placed women at the barricades from the beginning of their "war for independence."
We are eyewitnesses to the complete and utter perversion, distortion and inversion of the entirety of God's creation. We are still reaping the bitter, rotten fruit of the first feminist of them all, Eve.
The knot of Eve's prideful disobedience bound the human race to death. It was not until
the New Eve's perfect fiat, made at the Annunciation, which
feast we celebrate tomorrow, March 25, 2006, that Eve's knot was untied,
making it possible for the Gates of Heaven that had been closed by
Adam's sin to be re-opened when the New Adam, the Second Person of the
Blessed Trinity Who became Man in Our Lady's virginal and immaculate
womb, redeemed us on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday. Our Lady
untied the knot of Eve's prideful disobedience. Our Lord paid back the
debt of sin by permitting Himself to be nailed to the wood of a tree in
atonement for the first Adam's having stretched his hand out to the Tree
of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Pride has been the chief of the deadly sins from the
time of the Fall from Grace in the Garden of Eden to the present. It
will be with us until Our Lord comes in glory at the end of time to
judge the living and the dead. Although Baptism wipes away Original Sin
from our souls, flooding them with Baptismal Innocence, that is, the
very inner life of the Blessed Trinity by means of sanctifying grace, we
still suffer from the vestigial after-effects of Original Sin. That is,
just as a physical disease or affliction can leave us disabled for the
rest of our lives--or considerably weakened for a long period of time,
so is it the case that Original Sin and each one of our own Actual Sins
darkens our intellects and weakens our wills, inclining us all the more
to sin. Each one of our sins makes it less possible for us to grow in
virtue and to scale the heights of personal sanctity, passing from the
Purgative Stage of the interior life through the Illuminative Stage to
the Way of Perfection. We must be assiduous about making reparation for
our sins by offering up all of the pains and sufferings and injustices
and humiliations we suffer in this passing life--along with our prayers
and whatever merits we earn for our performance of indulgenced acts--to
be offered up to Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart as her
consecrated slaves. We are to die loving God as He has revealed Himself
through His true Church more than we love ourselves and our disordered
Every man, woman and child is called to remember that he is a creature, a contingent being who did not create himself and whose mortal body is destined one day for the corruption of the grave. None of us is the equal to the Most Blessed Trinity. We must submit ourselves to everything He has revealed to us through Holy Mother Church without seeking to declare ourselves "equal" before Him, without Whom we do not take our very next breath. We must pray to Him humbly as His consecrated slaves through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, especially by means of her Most Holy Rosary.
Yes, my friends, it is the Rosary that is, after Holy Mass and Eucharistic piety, the chief means by which the evils of the present day will be retarded and the seeds planted for the Triumph of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Instead of babbling on about one naturalistic "solution" after another in alleged "debates," those who aspire to high office ought to be promoting Our Lady's Holy Rosary, which speaks more powerfully of our total reliance upon Christ the King and upon her, Our Immaculate Queen, than all of the meaningless verbiage that passes out like so much gas from the mouth and is then lost the fogs of the minds of men.
Pope Leo XIII, writing in Laetitiae Sanctae, September 8, 1893, noted:
The third evil for which a remedy is needed is one which is chiefly characteristic of the times in which we live. Men in former ages, although they loved the world, and loved it far too well, did not usually aggravate their sinful attachment to the things of earth by a contempt of the things of heaven. Even the right-thinking portion of the pagan world recognized that this life was not a home but a dwelling-place, not our destination, but a stage in the journey. But men of our day, albeit they have had the advantages of Christian instruction, pursue the false goods of this world in such wise that the thought of their true Fatherland of enduring happiness is not only set aside, but, to their shame be it said, banished and entirely erased from their memory, notwithstanding the warning of St. Paul, "We have not here a lasting city, but we seek one which is to come" (Heb. xiii., 4).
When We seek out the causes of this forgetfulness, We are met in the first place by the fact that many allow themselves to believe that the thought of a future life goes in some way to sap the love of our country, and thus militates against the prosperity of the commonwealth. No illusion could be more foolish or hateful. Our future hope is not of a kind which so monopolizes the minds of men as to withdraw their attention from the interests of this life. Christ commands us, it is true, to seek the Kingdom of God, and in the first place, but not in such a manner as to neglect all things else. For, the use of the goods of the present life, and the righteous enjoyment which they furnish, may serve both to strengthen virtue and to reward it. The splendor and beauty of our earthly habitation, by which human society is ennobled, may mirror the splendor and beauty of our dwelling which is above. Therein we see nothing that is not worthy of the reason of man and of the wisdom of God. For the same God who is the Author of Nature is the Author of Grace, and He willed not that one should collide or conflict with the other, but that they should act in friendly alliance, so that under the leadership of both we may the more easily arrive at that immortal happiness for which we mortal men were created.
But men of carnal mind, who love nothing but themselves, allow their thoughts to grovel upon things of earth until they are unable to lift them to that which is higher. For, far from using the goods of time as a help towards securing those which are eternal, they lose sight altogether of the world which is to come, and sink to the lowest depths of degradation. We may doubt if God could inflict upon man a more terrible punishment than to allow him to waste his whole life in the pursuit of earthly pleasures, and in forgetfulness of the happiness which alone lasts for ever.
It is from this danger that they will be happily rescued, who, in the pious practice of the Rosary, are wont, by frequent and fervent prayer, to keep before their minds the glorious mysteries. These mysteries are the means by which in the soul of a Christian a most clear light is shed upon the good things, hidden to sense, but visible to faith, "which God has prepared for those who love Him." From them we learn that death is not an annihilation which ends all things, but merely a migration and passage from life to life. By them we are taught that the path to Heaven lies open to all men, and as we behold Christ ascending thither, we recall the sweet words of His promise, "I go to prepare a place for you." By them we are reminded that a time will come when "God will wipe away every tear from our eyes," and that "neither mourning, nor crying, nor sorrow, shall be any more," and that "We shall be always with the Lord," and "like to the Lord, for we shall see Him as He is," and "drink of the torrent of His delight," as "fellow-citizens of the saints," in the blessed companionship of our glorious Queen and Mother. Dwelling upon such a prospect, our hearts are kindled with desire, and we exclaim, in the words of a great saint, "How vile grows the earth when I look up to heaven!" Then, too, shall we feel the solace of the assurance "that which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory" (2 Cor. iv., 17).
Here alone we discover the true relation between time and eternity, between our life on earth and our life in heaven; and it is thus alone that are formed strong and noble characters. When such characters can be counted in large numbers, the dignity and well-being of society are assured. All that is beautiful, good, and true will flourish in the measure of its conformity to Him who is of all beauty, goodness, and truth the first Principle and the Eternal Source. (Pope Leo XIII, Laetitiae Sanctae, September 8, 1893.)
No, I will never tire of reminding the readers of this site that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. I will never tire of opposing the lies of naturalism and of documenting the various ways in which the naturalists of the false opposites of the "right" and of the "left" agree on the same basic anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian principles upon which the Modern state is based. And I will never tire of reminding readers of this site that we must, as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, use the shield of the Brown Scapular and the weapon of the Most Holy Rosary to combat the forces of the world, the flesh and the devil in our own lives so that we might be able to plant a few seeds for the glorious day when all men and all women everywhere will exclaim:
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Ransom, 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.
Saint Francis de Sales, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?