Herods to the Naturalist Right, Herods to the Naturalist Left
Thomas A. Droleskey
Herods abound in our world.
There are Herods to our naturalist right.
There are Herods to the our naturalist left.
There are Herods in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Even though there are some out there in cyberspace who, being so agitated by the exigencies of of the moment, permit themselves to fall prey to the devil's agitation that takes place as the false opposites of the naturalist "right" an "left" battle with each other biennially and quadrennially and thus do not recall much, if anything, of what has happened in the past or what they have read in the past. Those who are easily agitated by whatever events unfold with immediacy tend to react with emotional fury and illogic whenever their most fervent "hopes" for "improvement" at the ballot box are said to be illusory.
Thus it is that some readers get upset with me every two to five years for exploding the myths of Americanism that have given us a system of false "opposites" that exists to accustoming us to accepting increasingly higher and higher doses of an allegedly "lesser" evil in order to "liberate" themselves from a supposedly "greater evil," believing that "all I do" is "bash Republicans." Never mind the fact that evil upon evil has been further institutionalized no matter whichever set of naturalists winds up victorious in a particular election cycle.
No, one is expected to maintain a "prudent silence" about whatever flaws one believes exists in the Republican Party so as not to "help" the candidates of the Democratic Party. This is, of course, very similar to the "prudent silence" that so many traditionally-minded Catholics maintain who are attached to the conciliar structures maintain order to show their "pope" how grateful they are to have access to "approved" offerings or, in most cases, simulations of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that is about to go yet more modernization soon (Next Stop On The Motu Madness Merry-Go-Round: 1969 And Beyond).
As unpopular as I am and as very little supported as the work of this site is, now as never before, I have a responsibility to present the readership of this site with what I know to be true, namely, that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. There are no "short cuts" to retard the spread of the evils that afflict us. None. Zero.
Those, therefore, who would accuse me, as some have, of "bashing Republicans" to "help Obama" are living in fantasy worlds of their own choosing. There have been over five hundred articles about Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero and his institutionalization of one evil after another since late-2007. None of those articles have been praiseworthy of Obama and his lies. I could provide you with a series of links to prove this to you. To do so, however, is very time consuming. There is a search engine at the bottom of the home page of this website. Put in key words such as "Obama," "Barack Obama" and "Barack Hussein Obama" for a list of the articles that have been written about this consummate Marxist-trained statist.
Similarly, I wrote scores upon scores of articles in The Wanderer in the 1990s about the evils promoted by the administration of former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, who will be speaking at the Democratic National Convention a week from tonight, that is, on Wednesday, September 5, 2012, the Feast of Saint Lawrence Justinian. Clinton's wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, currently the Secretary of State of the United States of America, came in for a great deal of criticism back in the 1990s and around two hundred articles on this site have paid her some "attention," shall we say. Again, one of these articles has been praiseworthy of either Clinton.
This website exists not to engage in fantasies or to promote the so-called "lesser of two evils." This website exists to present the truths of the Catholic Faith concerning the Social Reign of Christ the King and to point out that the lords of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism are just as much enemies of Our Lord's Kingship over men and their nations as are the lords of Modernity. If I wanted to please men and to tickle their ears with fantasies of naturalism, I could have been a well-paid, popular and highly visible face of "conservatism." Such is not the path to the sanctification or salvation of my immortal soul. It's Christ the King or it is nothing but chaos. Period.
One of the themes that I have tried to drive home in the current election cycle is that Willard Mitt Romney, who is now the nominee of the Republican Party for the office of President of the United States of America, is simply "Obama Lite." He is concerned about getting elected for the sake of getting elected, which is why he took a pro-death position when running in 1994 for the United States Senate against United States Senator Edward Moore Kennedy (D-Kennedy) and in 2002 when running for Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts against Commonwealth Treasurer Shannon O'Brien and why he mouthed "pro-life" slogans when he run for the Republican Party presidential nomination in the 2008 and 2012 election cycles.
As I have demonstrated in several articles, including Blood Money Talks Loud And Clear and Only So Much Tolerance In The Republican Big Tent, Willard Mitt Romney does not care about the restoration of full legal protection to the innocent preborn.
Willard Mitt Romney does not believe that there is any connection at all between the promotion and institutionalization of the shedding of the blood of innocent babies in their mothers' wombs and economic distress. Willard Mitt Romney does not believe that those who promote the chemical and surgical killing of babies on an unrestricted basis are disqualified from holding any office of public trust, whether elected or appointed. How can he? He supports the chemical assassination of children, which is what most contraceptives do and what they do most of the time, and he supports the surgical slicing and dicing or burning or suctioning of innocent preborn babies in certain "hard" cases.
How do I do this?
Well, distancing himself entirely from the national platform of the Republican Party quite considerably, which should prove once again that Republican Party platforms are meaningless, Willard Mitt Romney told us in an interview with Scott Pelley of the Columbia Broadcasting System television network that he supports "legal abortion" in several "hard cases":
CBS News) In an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley,
Mitt Romney said his views on abortion rights are more lenient than
those put forward in the Republican party platform.
position has been clear throughout this campaign," Romney said. "I'm in
favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest, and the
health and life of the mother."
The Republican Party is
gathering in Tampa, Fla., this week for its national convention, where
in addition to nominating Romney for president, the party will
officially adopt its national platform. Last week, the party added
language to the platform calling for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with no mention of making exceptions for victims of rape or incest, or to save the life of the mother.
President Obama in an interview Saturday said that if Romney were president, the Republica would not stand in the way if Congress attempted to strip women of their reproductive health rights. Democrats have recently stepped up their attacks against the GOP ticket on the issue of reproductive rights, in part because of the strong views held by Romney's running mate Rep. Paul Ryan, and in part because of the controversial remarks GOP Senate candidate Todd Akin made on rape and abortion.
Romney, however, told Pelley that the issue amounts to a distraction.
this is the decision that will be made by the Supreme Court," he said.
"The Democrats try and make this a political issue every four years, but
this is a matter in the courts. It's been settled for some time in the
Pelley also asked Romney about changes in the Republican party since the height of his father, George Romney's, political career and about how Romney is confronting the perceived enthusiasm gap in the GOP. (My views on abortion rights are clear.)
Yes, Willard Mitt Romney believes that innocent babies may be executed surgically in the usual "hard cases" and also if it is alleged that a mother's health, not only her life, is said to be endangered. This is what William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Albert Arnold Gore, Jr., offered Congressional Republicans in order for them to support what was only partial ban on partial-birth abortions that included an "exception" in the event that a mother's life is endangered even though pro-abortion doctors testified that there was never any circumstance in which it is necessary to kill a child by using the "dilation and extraction" method. Critics of the Clinton-Gore proposal, which was championed by then United States Senate Minority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-South Dakota), a pro-abortion Catholic, and the then and current United States House of Representatives Minority Leader, Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi, as the price for their supporting passage of the partial-birth abortion ban in the administration of President George Walker Bush, pointed out that a "health of the mother" exception could be used to cover anything, including "emotional health," to justify the use of the dilation and evacuation method of in the later stages of a child's development in his mother's womb.
Health of the mother? Health of the mother? Health of the mother?
Why don't you just come right out and say it, Willard Mitt Romney? Despite all of your cliches about "life," you don't care how many babies get killed in this country by chemical and surgical means every day. Indeed, you told Scott Pelley that abortion is an issue for the Supreme Court of the United States of America to decide, that "it's been settled for some tine in the courts." You have not a blessed clue about this issue and what is even more important is the simple fact that you do not care.
Willard Mitt Romney, you do not realize that the issue of the shedding of innocent human life under cover of the civil law is not "settled" in the courts.
Willard Mitt Romney, you do not realize that the issue of the shedding of innocent human life under cover of the civil law is not "settled" in national, state or local legislatures.
Willard Mitt Romney, you do not realize that the issue of the shedding of innocent human life under cover of the civil law is not "settled" by orders issued by executives or by "decisions" of the voters in a referendum.
No, Willard Mitt Romney. A thousand times no.
The true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, Whom you mock with you false worship of a false conception that makes Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ a "spirit brother" of the devil, "settled" this from all eternity. He has inscribed His immutable laws on the very flesh of our hearts. He has written it with his own finger on the tablets of stone that He gave to Moses atop Mount Sinai. This binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment's injunction, "Thou shalt not kill," can never be "unsettled" by any action undertaken by one man or by a number men acting collectively in the name of the others in an institution of civil governance. Men are to obey the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as they have been entrusted to and are taught definitively and infallibly by the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.
It's even worse than all of this if you consider a not-so-surprising statement out of the mouth of Willard Mitt Romney's own sister, contained in an article in today's issue of The New York Times about a "conservative "super political action committee ("Super PAC") devoted to women's issues:
What is missing from the all-inclusive spot? Any discussion of the social issues — abortion, same-sex marriage, insurance coverage for birth control — that have at times engulfed the Republican nominating contest. “We don’t talk social issues,” said Mary Ann Carter, policy director for the Young Guns Network, who manages the pavilion, as several young women from the convention milled about the space sipping coffee and shopping for souvenirs. “We talk about the economy. We talk about health care. We talk about energy.”
This refrain is often heard in and around the convention these days. In dozens of interviews, women at the convention made clear that social issues are now taking a back seat. Even those who passionately agree (or disagree) with the new conservative party platform — calling for traditional marriage, public display of the Ten Commandments and a sweeping ban on abortion — did not seem to want to discuss the subject. (The one exception was Mr. Romney’s sister Jane, who on Wednesday declared that if Mr. Romney is elected president, a ban on abortion is “never going to happen.”)
Instead, women at the convention preferred to point to opening night on Tuesday, when a parade of Republican women took to the podium, including Ann Romney, who spoke about her family, and Gov. Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina, who preached a gospel of economic empowerment, free of meddlesome government rules and regulations.
Being visible was one way, Republican women said, to counter the Obama campaign’s charge that their party is waging a war on women.
“They’re doing the soft love approach,” said Sandra Stroman, a convention participant from Chester, S.C. “They’re holding up our women in this party and putting those women in front of the cameras, saying, ‘Here are our Republican women. Do they look like we have waged war against them?’ ”
With the intention of appealing to voters beyond the party’s base, many Republican women are simply avoiding the mention of abortion or gay rights because they are seen as too divisive in such a close, contentious race. Some acknowledge deliberately playing down their own views as a strategic move. Instead, they want to talk about the economy, just like the Romney campaign.
“Anything that gives women the idea that they can’t find friends in the Republican Party is unhelpful,” said Kristen Soltis, a pollster who is an adviser to Restore Our Future, a pro-Romney super PAC. (Republican Women Play Down Social Issues.)
I have been telling you for two decades now that this day was coming, that the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist "right" was going to bury the issue of the inviolability of innocent human life once and for all, that most "pro-lifers" would accept this because they have been conditioned to think only in terms of naturalism while failing to understand that compromise with a "lesser evil" out of the fear of a "greater evil" winds up increasing on an incremental basis the dose of the so-called "lesser evil" that is considered "acceptable."
Well, I guess it's easy to keep believing in the political equivalent of the tooth fairy. It's easier than thinking. It's easier than seeing the world through the supernatural eyes of the Holy Faith.
Behold your "lesser of two evils" in 2012. Lots and lots of luck to you.
Those who campaign by refusing to speak out forcefully in condemnation of the moral evils of our day in order to appeal to "swing" voters will govern in the exact same manner so as to win re-election. I have been trying to hammer home this point for decades now. People get so agitated and so excited by the events of the moment that they choose most voluntarily not to think that this is so.
Willard Mitt Romney is a slave of false, Americanist religion and a practitioner of craven careerist politics, reinventing himself constantly to be whatever he needs to be in order to "win" for the sake of winning.
Sadly, Paul Davis Ryan, a well-meaning product of the false conciliar religion and of the "heavy metal" noise of the world is equally of the devil, champions the religious indifferentism that is a cornerstone of the modern civil state, a cornerstone that is composed of nothing other than sand from a sand castle, destined to collapse over the course of time as the waves of turbulent events wash it away.
The fact that a man such as Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero can rise to prominence, be elected as President of the United States of America and remain popular with between two-fifths and one-half of Americans of voting age is the direct product of a country founded in the false belief that "one religion"--or "no religious belief at all"--is as good as another as long as we abide by a "common moral creed," something that is at the heart of Judeo-Masonry and denies outright the Sovereignty of Christ the King over men and their nations. Barack Hussein Obama is a product of the myths of Americanism that Willard Mitt Romney and his vice presidential running-mate, United States Representative Paul Davis Ryan (R-Wisconsin), believe are at the foundation of social order. Great work if you can get it, I suppose. Such a false belief is no path to personal sanctity. It is no path to true social order.
See, for example, what Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XI had to say on this exact subject of a "common moral creed:"
A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of
his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely
natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to
know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he
should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this
is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is
vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. "If
anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall
wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he
burneth" john xv., 6). "He that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark
xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value
and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in
spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in
such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the
increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it
can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end
by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely
secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our
forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and
administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as
the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose
its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two
most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the
hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods
will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the
largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The
consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace
abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
The Church does not say that morality belongs purely, in the
sense of exclusively, to her; but that it belongs wholly to her. She has
never maintained that outside her fold and apart from her teaching, man
cannot arrive at any moral truth; she has on the contrary more than
once condemned this opinion because it has appeared under more forms
than one. She does however say, has said, and will ever say, that
because of her institution by Jesus Christ, because of the Holy Ghost
sent her in His name by the Father, she alone possesses what she has had
immediately from God and can never lose, the whole of moral truth,
omnem veritatem, in which all individual moral truths are included, as
well those which man may learn by the help of reason, as those which
form part of revelation or which may be deduced from it (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Ryan provided us last night with a perfect description of how the false words of Modernity and Modernism have combined to convince millions of baptized Catholics that social order is completely irrelevant to a civil state's recognizing the true religion and according her the favor and the protection of the civil law as the common temporal good is sought in light of man's Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity:
Mitt and I also go to different churches. But in any church, the best
kind of preaching is done by example. And I’ve been watching that
example. The man who will accept your nomination tomorrow is prayerful
and faithful and honorable. Not only a defender of marriage, he offers
an example of marriage at its best. Not only a fine businessman, he’s a
fine man, worthy of leading this optimistic and good-hearted country.
different faiths come together in the same moral creed. We believe that
in every life there is goodness; for every person, there is hope. Each
one of us was made for a reason, bearing the image and likeness of the
Lord of Life.
We have responsibilities, one to another – we do not
each face the world alone. And the greatest of all responsibilities, is
that of the strong to protect the weak. The truest measure of any
society is how it treats those who cannot defend or care for themselves.
of these great moral ideas is essential to democratic government – to
the rule of law, to life in a humane and decent society. They are the
moral creed of our country, as powerful in our time, as on the day of
America’s founding. They are self-evident and unchanging, and sometimes,
even presidents need reminding, that our rights come from nature and
God, not from government. (Ryan Delivers Acceptance Address.)
So what that Mitt and you go to "different churches," Representative Ryan? So what?
I tell you what.
Willard Mitt Romney served as a Mormon "missionary" in France in 1966. His "mission" was the same of Mormon "missionaries" in Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America: to take Catholics out of the Catholic Church. This is a "mission" inspired by the devil himself even though Willard Mitt Romney believes that the is doing the work of God.
Catholicism and Mormonism do not come together in the "same moral creed" because Mormonism rejects the Apostles' Creed and thus, being a false religion, rejects articles contained therein and defined infallibly by the Catholic Church alone.
How can it be said that Mormonism, where contraception is considered to be a "private" decision made by "marriage partners": You doubt my word? You think that I am making this up? Guess again:
Mormons do believe that we each come to earth to grow, mature and be tested. In this
process of mortal life we marry and when we are able, provide mortal
bodies for Heavenly Father's children. It is the blessing of each
father and mother to bring children into the world, to teach them
righteous principles and to be sealed to them in the Mormon Temple for eternity. In our Heavenly Father's plan, Mormon members are taught
that we each have our free agency, and that in matters concerning: when
to have children, how many to have, and all other questions regarding
such, it is between the marriage partners and God.
Mormons have never been told to have 'several children' or to 'never use birthcontrol.' As was mentioned, those questions are between the father, mother and God. (Mormons and Birth Control.)
The "same moral creed," Representative Ryan? Think again. You are most wrong.
Willard Mitt Romney, the man who is supposedly a "defender of marriage" by virtue of the example has given in his own marriage even though he supported special "rights" for those engaged in the perverse misuse of the gifts given by God to a man and woman to be used exclusively in marriage for the procreation and education of children when running for Governor of Massachusetts ten years ago now, is indeed a "faithful" Mormon and has boasted of his support for contraception, whose use is fully permitted by his manufactured religion (see Only So Much Tolerance In The Republican Big Tent).
It matters, ladies and gentlemen, that Willard Mitt Romney worked to take souls out of the Catholic Faith.
It matters, ladies and gentlemen, that Willard Mitt Romney supports the slicing and dicing of innocent human beings in their mothers' wombs in what we can call the "hard cases plus one" rule of craven political careerists of the false opposite of the naturalist "right."
It matters, ladies and gentlemen, that Willard Mitt Romney supports contraception, which is in and of itself a violation of the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage even in those circumstances when a contraceptive device does not kill an innocent human being.
This all matters to God.
Why does not it matter to us? Why does not it matter to how he will govern? Why does not it matter that these beliefs lead to the further institutionalization and acceptance of moral evils under cover of the civil law?
The willingness of craven career politicians of the false opposite of the naturalist "right to abandon almost all direct mention of the surgical assassination of innocent preborn human life except before friendly Catholic audiences or when asked directly about it by an interviewer is but the logical consequence of the rhetorical lip-service paid to the issue by President Ronald Wilson Reagan.
Sure, Ronald Reagan spoke about the issue in almost every State of the Union address. He spoke with the late Nellie Gray, the founder and president of the March for Life Defense and Education Fund. As I have noted in many articles on this site, little of substance was done in his eight years as president and then in the four years of President George Hebert Walker Bush that followed him that was not undone by several strokes of pen by executive orders signed by President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton on January 22, 1993, the twentieth anniversary of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton.
Making reference for the moment only to the level of pure naturalism, supposedly "pro-life" voters have been accomplices in the further institutionalizing and social acceptance of the chemical and surgical execution of innocent preborn babies under cover of the civil law by accept rhetorical crumbs and absolutely meaningless pieces of legislation that have saved zero lives and "executive orders" that have been fraught with as many loopholes as Willard Mitt Romney's "health of the mother" exception. It is far easier to believe that "something is being done" than look dispassionately at the hard evidence proving that the little good that most "pro-life" voters think has been done is but a sham to pull the wool over their eyes so as to keep them on the electoral "reservation" to enable the careerists of the false opposite of the naturalist "right" to be re-elected and to increase their hold on power.
To what end? To please Christ the King?
Ha, perish the thought. To one end and one end alone do the careerists of the false opposite of the naturalist "right" live and breath and move and have their being: electoral success, which the careerists of the "right" can be aided by avoiding discussion of "divisive" issues and concentrating on what really matters to a nation, "the money, the money, the money."
Although it is arguably the case that, if left to his own devices without the shackles imposed by the Romney campaign, Representative Ryan might have said something more than the "Lord of life" and than by referencing "those who cannot defend themselves" that he used a codes to speak about indirectly abortion, it is also true, however, that the babbling inanities he uttered about a nonexistent "common moral creed" that he believes binds him with the man who is his elder by twenty-three years, Willard Mitt Romney, is of the essence of the false conciliar religion that he believes is Catholicism. In this, you see, he cannot be blamed at all. He is being faithful to what he has been taught. What he has been taught, however, is as false as Willard Mitt Romney's Mormonism.
Once again, let us turn to our true popes for instruction:
For when favour and patronage is promised even to the sects of heretics
and their ministers, not only their persons, but also their very
errors, are tolerated and fostered: a system of errors in which is
contained that fatal and never sufficiently to be deplored HERESY which,
as St. Augustine says (de Haeresibus, no.72), "asserts that all
heretics proceed correctly and tell the truth: which is so absurd that
it seems incredible to me." (Pope Pius VII, Post Tam Diuturnas, April 29, 1814, POST TAM DIUTURNAS)
"This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to
that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of
conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred
and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the
greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,"
as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which
men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already
inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit"
is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and
out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes
transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things
and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state
than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities
renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this
single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free
speech, and desire for novelty.
Here We must include that harmful and never
sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and
disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote
with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines
and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books,
pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very
great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them
over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they
contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is
sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends
religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil
simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any
sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly,
stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who
use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this
time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious
and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to
teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil
progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed
without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist;
or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true
religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that
is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized,
as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties,
offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace
may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do
not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on
the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our
Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of
conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be
legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society;
and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which
should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil,
whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any
of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in
any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think
and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that
"if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there
will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in
the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very
teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and
wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling." (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)
To hold, therefore,
that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that
are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly
leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and
practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men
who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be
consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand
that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and
conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable,
equally good, and equally acceptable to God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship
with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups.
Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity
should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly
promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under
the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the
craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the
revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of
God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)
Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went
astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might
have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to
convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to
comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to
them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up
the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity
independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst
His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He
could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of
the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little
ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of
heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong
as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and
teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is
sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body.
Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal
happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons
and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is
possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way
of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to
apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation;
these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus
Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent
humanitarianism. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
Ultimately, therefore, the responsibility for the inanities uttered by United States Paul Davis Ryan, who said last evening that the United States of America" is still the greatest force for peace and liberty that this world has ever known," something that he should tell face-to-face to the Mexicans alive today who had fought as Cristeros against the American-backed brutalities imposed upon them by Plutarco Elis Calles (see Then, Now and Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part one, Then, Now and Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part two, Then, Now and Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part three, Then, Now And Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part four and Then, Now And Always: Viva Cristo Rey!, part five), rests with the conciliar "popes," including, of course, that blasphemer in His own right, the man who rejects the immutable doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King and propagates what Pope Pius VII termed a heresy, "religious liberty," as he denies the very nature of dogmatic truth, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
It is easy to respect men such as Willard Mitt Romney, as Paul Davis Ryan does, when the man almost everyone, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, believe is the "pope" esteems the symbols of false religions with his own priestly hands and enters in places of false worship and refers to them as "sacred" (see Respect Those Who Break the First Commandment? Respect Those Who Break the Fifth Commandment ). Paul Davis Ryan is not to blame for believing what he has been taught by the doctrinal, moral and liturgical revolutionaries of concilairism. The "buck" stops with the conciliar "popes" and the "bishops" who have been in communion with them.
As I tried to explain in person to a Catholic who is still attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the belief that it is the Catholic Church while seeing to defend the inviolability of innocent human life, as heinous as crimes against the binding precepts contained in the Fifth Commandment are, crimes against the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity caused by the violation of the binding precepts of the First, Second and Third Commandments make more possible the violation of all of the others, including "Thou shalt not kill."
After all, if one can offend God by praising false religions and their nonexistent ability to "contribute" to the building of a "better" world, a sin that is infinite in nature as it offends He Who is infinite, it is far, far easier to consider all innocent human life, whether in the womb or deemed to be "brain dead" subject to execution. Why should we be surprised that conciliar publications such as Our Sunday Visitor run emotionally-laden articles to promote the evil of "organ donation" that is premised upon the medical industry's manufactured myth of "brain death? (see Good Rule Of Thumb: Reject What Conciliarists Promote.)
Why the surprise?
Why the shock? Why the outrage?
The false "popes" have supported this evil and, more importantly, they have committed grave evils against the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity openly and publicly for all the world to see, convincing Catholics and non-Catholics alike universally to believe, despite all protestations to the contrary, that "one religion is as pleasing to God as another."
Who has outrage for this?
Not Our Sunday Visitor, which dutifully reports "papal" blasphemies as coming from the hand of the true God of Divine Revelation Who has been blasphemed and spat upon by each of the conciliar popes. Do not be outraged at Our Sunday Visitor simply because of its support for "vital organ donation" that the conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" have endorsed. There exists a predilection among most Catholics to accept moral outrages because they have been preconditioned to accepted offenses against Faith and Worship that have filled the pages of this newspaper for decades now as being perfectly consonant with the Catholic Faith.
How is it possible for Catholics in the conciliar structures to oppose various moral evils under cover of the civil law when their supposed "pope" commits infinite sins against God repeatedly and without interruption, daring also, as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has had the temerity to do recently, to exhort Catholics in the conciliar structures not to "compromise on any point of Catholic truth"? How is it at all logical for a man who himself defies anathematized propositions concerning the nature of the dogmatic truth to be Its defender? It is impossible. Impossible. (For the most recent listing of Ratzinger/Benedict's warfare against the nature of dogmatic truth as contrasted with the Catholic Church's consistent condemnation of it, see the afore cited Good Rule Of Thumb: Reject What Conciliarists Promote).
Well, look at this. I am not obeying my physician friend's advice to get to bed earlier. This is all for now, therefore.
Well, this is all for now except to note, if you will permit me another me while I wait for more of you to respond to the update on the Donations page a week ago today (a little hint--all but six of the two hundred one people who have read that update have responded thus far), that Paul Davis Ryan, who makes the "life of the mother" "exception" and is not truly "pro-life" but simply less pro-abortion than his "health of the mother" exception running mate, Willard Mitt Romney, had better read the following passage from Pope Pius XI's Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937, to understand that no one is free to use any reference to the Holy Name of God while divorcing such a reference to what He has taught to men exclusively through the Catholic Church, who can never be stained with the slightest hint of error:
Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State,
or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any
other fundamental value of the human community -- however necessary and
honorable be their function in worldly things -- whoever raises these
notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous
level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created
by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of
life which that faith upholds.
Beware, Venerable Brethren, of that growing abuse,
in speech as in writing, of the name of God as though it were a
meaningless label, to be affixed to any creation, more or less
arbitrary, of human speculation. Use your influence on the Faithful,
that they refuse to yield to this aberration. Our God is the Personal
God, supernatural, omnipotent, infinitely perfect, one in the Trinity of
Persons, tri-personal in the unity of divine essence, the Creator of
all existence. Lord, King and ultimate Consummator of the history of the
world, who will not, and cannot, tolerate a rival God by His side.
This God, this Sovereign Master, has issued
commandments whose value is independent of time and space, country and
race. As God's sun shines on every human face so His law knows neither
privilege nor exception. Rulers and subjects, crowned and uncrowned,
rich and poor are equally subject to His word. From the fullness of the
Creators' right there naturally arises the fullness of His right to be
obeyed by individuals and communities, whoever they are. This obedience
permeates all branches of activity in which moral values claim harmony
with the law of God, and pervades all integration of the ever-changing
laws of man into the immutable laws of God.
None but superficial minds could stumble into
concepts of a national God, of a national religion; or attempt to lock
within the frontiers of a single people, within the narrow limits of a
single race, God, the Creator of the universe, King and Legislator of
all nations before whose immensity they are "as a drop of a bucket"
(Isaiah xI, 15). (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)
In other words, the true God of Divine Revelation is not the "god" of Willard Mitt Romney. Paul Davis Ryan, being trained in the errors of Americanism that helped to path the way for the rise of conciliarism (see Conversion in Reverse: How the Ethos of Americanism Converted Catholics and Contributed to the Rise of Conciliarism), does not understand or accept this.
Therefore, I ask one of you good readers out there in cyberspace to send this article to Representative Ryan (perhaps one of you may be his constituent while others might live in Wisconsin) so that he can be forced to see with his own eyes the distinction between Catholicism and the false religion of conciliarism that has so much in common with all other false religions, including Willard Mitt Romney's Mormonism.
In the meantime, remember these words from Pope Saint Pius X and Pope Pius XI:
Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
20. Every true and lasting reform has ultimately sprung from the sanctity of men who were driven by the love of God and of men. Generous, ready to stand to attention to any call from God, yet confident in themselves because confident in their vocation, they grew to the size of beacons and reformers. On the other hand, any reformatory zeal, which instead of springing from personal purity, flashes out of passion, has produced unrest instead of light, destruction instead of construction, and more than once set up evils worse than those it was out to remedy. No doubt "the Spirit breatheth where he will" (John iii. 8): "of stones He is able to raise men to prepare the way to his designs" (Matt. iii. 9). He chooses the instruments of His will according to His own plans, not those of men. But the Founder of the Church, who breathed her into existence at Pentecost, cannot disown the foundations as He laid them. Whoever is moved by the spirit of God, spontaneously adopts both outwardly and inwardly, the true attitude toward the Church, this sacred fruit from the tree of the cross, this gift from the Spirit of God, bestowed on Pentecost day to an erratic world. (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)