On Full Display: Every Americanist Error Imaginable
by Thomas A. Droleskey
More details are emerging about the terrible tragedy that took place at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in the Town of Newtown, Connecticut, on Friday, December 14, 2012, when twenty children and five adults at the school were killed by Adam Lanza, who were shot some of the dead children from three to eleven times. Lanza, who was twenty-years of age, had first killed his mother by shooting her in the face before he headed off to the school to start his rampage.
As noted in Saturday's commentary, Cultural Liberalism Leads To Death, Lanza was described as a tech-geek by more than one person who knew him. Several people described him as a "Goth" who dressed in black and walked around while looking around various gadgets. At least one person said that it did not surprise her to discover that he had been identified as the shooter.
Lanza, who lived with his mother, Nancy Lanza, in Newtown, Connecticut, did not live in poverty. His father, who was, reports indicate, divorced against his will in 2008, voluntarily provided his mother alimony payments in excess of the $240,000 annually that had been agreed to in the divorce settlement. Part of that money was used by Nancy Lanza to purchase the very weapons that her son used to kill her before he drove to the school to begin his well-planned massacre.
Although I noted Saturday that I had not as of then received an automated message from Newtown First Selectman Patricia Llodra, that changed on Saturday evening. We are still on the automated list. The message was, sadly, indicative of how almost all Americans, including most Catholics, "cope" in the midst of these terrible tragedies while forgetting the simple fact that around four thousand innocent children are killed every in abortuaries around the nation and that thousands more die every day as a result of chemical abortifacients.
The well-meaning Mrs. Llodra discussed the necessity of "coming together" and "keeping strong," emphasizing than an "interfaith" prayer service would take place Sunday evening, December 17, 2012, Gaudete Sunday, the Third Sunday of Advent. Unfortunately, of course, it is sacrilegious events such as that "interfaith" prayer service that make last Friday's tragedy more possible as they do not please the true God of Divine Revelation and make it appear as though He "smiles" on "community togetherness" in the face of tragedy that is result of a world in direct rebellion against Him and His Holy Church. Another such message was received this morning, Gaudete Sunday, explaining that the "interfaith" prayer service was being held principally for the parents and relatives of the murdered children and the relatives of the others who were killed as well as the "community" of Sandy Hook Elementary School. Others were told to watch the event on television.
Highlighting the atrocity to the honor and glory and majesty of God known as the "interfaith" prayer service, something that got its start right here in the religious indifferentist United States of America with the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago, Illinois, from September 11-17, 1893, seventeen years before the so-called "World Missionary Conference" that took place in Edinburgh, Scotland, that gave formal birth to the "ecumenical" movement that would be condemned in no uncertain terms by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, which reiterated the perennial Catholic teaching forbidding all "interreligious" prayer services:
10. So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never
allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the
union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true
Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have
unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is visible to
all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the
same as He instituted it. During the lapse of centuries, the mystical Spouse of
Christ has never been contaminated, nor can she ever in the future be
contaminated, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made
false to her Spouse: she is incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling,
she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly." The
same holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could believe
that "this unity in the Church which arises from a divine foundation, and which
is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be rent and torn asunder by the
force of contrary wills." For since the mystical body of Christ, in the same
manner as His physical body, is one, compacted and fitly joined
together, it were foolish and out of place to say that the mystical body is
made up of members which are disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore
is not united with the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with
Christ its head. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
The Holy Office of the Inquisition reaffirmed Pope Pius XI's reiteration of the ban on "interreligious" prayer meetings and services twenty years later, in 1948:
gatherings of non-Catholics with Catholics have been reportedly held in
various places, where things pertaining to the Faith have been
discussed against the prescriptions of the Sacred Canons and without
previous permission of the Holy See. Therefore all are reminded that
according to the norm of Canon 1325 § 3 laypeople as well as clerics
both secular and regular are forbidden to attend these gatherings
without the aforesaid permission. It is however much less licit for
Catholics to summon and institute such kind of gatherings. Let therefore
Ordinaries urge all to serve these prescriptions accurately.
are to be observed with even stronger force of law when it comes to
gatherings called “ecumenical”, which laypeople and clerics may not
attend at all without previous consent of the Holy See.
Moreover, since acts of mixed worship have also been
posed not rarely both within and without the aforesaid gatherings, all
are once more warned that any communication in sacred affairs is totally
forbidden according to the norm of Canons 1258 and 731, § 2.
Given at Rome, at the premises of the Holy Office, on June 5th 1948. (This was translated by those who run Novus Ordo Watch. See The Holy Office's 1948 Canonical Warning against Ecumenical Gatherings.)
Yet it is that, of course, that the conciliar "popes" have praised the "ecumenical movement" and have themselves participated in "interfaith" prayer meetings and given "joint blessings" with the "clergy" of non-Catholic religions. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has on more than one occasion praised the 1910 World Missionary Conference that began the "ecumenical movement" later condemned eighteen years later by Pope Pius XI:
Much has happened in Scotland and in the Church in this country since
that historic visit. I note with great satisfaction how Pope John Paul’s
call to you to walk hand in hand with your fellow Christians has led to
greater trust and friendship with the members of the Church of
Scotland, the Scottish Episcopal Church and others. Let me
encourage you to continue to pray and work with them in building a
brighter future for Scotland based upon our common Christian heritage.
In today’s first reading we heard Saint Paul appeal to the Romans to
acknowledge that, as members of Christ’s body, we belong to each other
(cf. Rom 12:5) and to live in respect and mutual love. In that
spirit I greet the ecumenical representatives who honour us by their
presence. This year marks the 450th anniversary of the Reformation
Parliament, but also the 100th anniversary of the World Missionary
Conference in Edinburgh, which is widely acknowledged to mark the birth
of the modern ecumenical movement. Let us give thanks to God for the
promise which ecumenical understanding and cooperation represents for a
united witness to the saving truth of God’s word in today’s rapidly
changing society. (Service staged in Bellahouston Park, Glasgow, 16 September 2010.)
As noted before, it was but sixteen years before the World Missionary Conference that the Parliament of the World's Religions at taken place in Chicago, Illinois. James Cardinal Gibbons, the Americanist Archbishop of Baltimore from 1877 to 1921, was a prominently featured speaker, lending Catholic "legitimacy" to the travesty, which included spiritualists, Buddhists, Hindus, Christian Scientists and the first public mention of the strange sect known as Baha'i (there is a very large Baha'i "temple" in the Chicago, Illinois, area). The late Dr. Justin Walsh explained the role played by Bishop John Joseph Keane, then the rector of The Catholic University of America in Washington, District of Columbia, a complete and utter den of Americanism from its inception, at this travesty:
As rector of the CUA, John J.
Keane orchestrated participation in a display of unrestrained religious
indifferentism, long held by the Church to be dangerous to the Faith.
Cardinal Gibbons, the highest-ranking prelate in the US, offered the
opening prayer on September 11. Overflowing with ecumenism, he recited
the Protestant version of the Lord's Prayer: "Forgive us our debts as we
forgive our debtors...For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever and ever!
Amen [emphasis on characteristically Protestant words added." Bishop
Keane seemed awestruck describing how "representatives of the principal
religions...passed in procession down the central aisle" for the solemn
A marvelous spectacle it was - that grouping of
all races and tongues, that variety of national costumes and religious
insignia, with the purple robe and gentle figure of our beloved cardinal
for center piece.
The "marvelous spectacle" was reprised at the
closing ceremony on September 28 when Gibbons again offered the
Protestant Lord's Prayer. During the congress the Cardinal spoke on
"interdenominational co-operation" and John Ireland delivered an address
on his favorite theme about how much America meant to Catholicism. John
Keane seemed especially pleased, lauding the proceedings in a souvenir
volume as an... "assemblage of intelligent and conscientious men,
presenting their religious convictions without minimizing, without
acrimony, without controversy, with love and truth and humanity."
Bishop Keane spent much of 1894 urging Catholics to
broaden their participation in such events. He started in January with
an article in the Bulletin de L'Institut Catholique of Paris. The
article advocated a kind of worldwide replication of the Columbian
Exposition so that Catholics might evangelize the modern world.
"The great discovery [of America]...inaugurated a Providential
revolution, a progress in the condition of society and in the whole
organization of human life....A distinctive feature in the mission of
America is the reunion of the long-divided children of God by the
destruction of barriers and enmities which separate race from race. Why
could not something of the kind be done with regard to religious
divisions and enmities? Why should not religious congresses combine in
an international congress of religions where all might meet in mutual
tolerance and charity, where all forms of religion might rise up
together against all forms of irreligion?"
In an address before the International Scientific Congress of Catholics
in Brussels the following September, Keane expanded his vision to
encompass the whole world.
"When we studied a map of Europe we saw it marked with little divisions -
lines that represent not merely territorial boundaries but jealousy and
hatred and hostility and division of hearts, expressed in God knows how
many millions of men armed to destroy the world. Now, from all these
nations God has permitted emigration to us. All nations...among
us...live together fraternally without enmity. God has privileged
America to destroy those traditions of national jealousies, which you in
Europe perpetuate, to mold them all in American unity....I have but to
look round me and see how the human race is setting itself more and more
to hate hatred and enmity. Humanity is beyond question striving for
gentler manners and a greater extension of charity. But is it not the
aim of religion to unite man with God and his fellow brethren? Religion
is charity! Even though we could not agree about creeds, is it not
possible to [agree] about charity?"
Keane concluded with the amazing statement that,
"because of certain prejudices," the Church would never convene a
Parliament of Religions. But, "since it is absolutely decided that the
Congress will meet, Catholic Church or no Catholic Church, our participation is a matter of necessity" [emphasis added].8
Orthodox Catholics considered Catholic
participation in religious congresses occasions of scandal and therefore
sinful. Other events of 1894 heightened anti-Americanist sentiment.
John Ireland's reckless intervention in the ecclesiastical and secular
politics of New York state was one. The dismissal of conservative
professors at the Catholic University was another. (Dr. Justin Walsh, Heresy Blossoms Like a Rose, The Angelus Online.)
Monsignor Henri Delassus took note of the Americanists' desire to push their nascent "ecumenism" into Europe:
How so? Fr. Hecker tells us: "A call is made to men who possess this new synthesis of truth who are able to solve the problems of eliminating antagonisms, of being reconciled with the need of our era;
of men who will take hold of all the aspirations of modern genius
effected by science, of social activity, of politics, of spirituality
(accordingly, spirituality itself would be called upon to defend the
Church and to procure her universal triumph), of religion, and of the
transformation of everything by means of the defense and universal
triumph for the Church" (The Life of Fr. Hecker.) (Monsignor Henri Delassus, Americanism and the Anti-Christian Conspiracy,
translated by Mr. Daniel Leonardi and published by Mr. Hugh Akins of
Catholic Action Resources Center, Orlando, Florida, October, 2007--first
printing in France, 1899, p. 2.)
The article from Romanus (in The Contemporary Review), that one could read in its entirety in the book of Abbot Klein, Fr. Hecker, Is He a Saint?, is, as the author of that book observes, the SUM of the ideas of Americanism ...
In clear terms [it says there]: GOD is the
author of error as He is of truth; the first precedes the second, and
the second is born of the first providentially. It is the
effect of the great law of evolution that rules everything in the world,
and to which religion is subjected as all the rest.
Could the Christian faith be more profoundly attacked, more radically destroyed? ...
It would not take too much to prove blamable
by these words, in the expression that they are presented throughout the
democracies, that they are anything but children of the doctrine of
evolution. That is, when the Americanists from here [Europe] and over
there [America] speak to us of the future, of "the new future of the
Church" and of its "marching ahead," and of its "new phase" and "of the
times that are beginning," etc., etc. ...
There had been in the Congress of Religion in
Chicago, a discourse given by one of the leaders in Americanism, and
which was entitled The Final Religion, The Ultimate Religion. In that
speech, it had been said: "The religions consist of systems for the
regular or irregular fulfillment of this great goal; the union of man
with God." It is impossible to better describe the way and the end of
religious evolution. But this end, the one that is to be watched out
for, is not any different than that to which the United Israelite
Alliance has directed its own efforts.
In the Fortnightly, on The Life of Fr, Hecker,
Abbot Klein explains to his readers, how that book more suitably makes
clear "the present evolution of humanity" and the nature "of studies and
reforms that the new conditions of the world, at once well contain, imposes, without possible resistance, upon all those who would promote the INTERIOR ADVANCEMENT and the EXTERIOR EXPANSION of Christianity ..."
These novel ways, do they keep in their novelty the necessary moral uprightness? This is what it is reasonable to doubt.
"I want," Fr. Hecker said, "to open the door of
the Church to the rationalists; they seem to me to be shut in on
themselves. I sense that I am the pioneer to open the way. I am myself
threading my way as in contraband [smuggling, interloping]" (The Life of Fr. Hecker). (Monsignor Henri Delassus, Americanism and the Anti-Christian Conspiracy,
translated by Mr. Daniel Leonardi and published by Mr. Hugh Akins of
Catholic Action Resources Center, Orlando, Florida, October, 2007--first
printing in France, 1899, pp. 9-11.)
What was hatched in this country and exported to Europe by the likes of Bishop John Keane, "modern ecumenism," was on full display last evening in the auditorium of Newtown High School in Newtown, Connecticut, as the full panoply of error, each of which is hideous in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, was displayed from the beginning to the end of the aforementioned "interfaith prayer vigil," as it was termed.
One false minister after another came up to spew error and blasphemy.
First up was a direct theological successor of the very hideous Puritans who came to these shores in 1619, one Robert Crebbin, the senior "minister" of the Newtown Congregational Church. The Congregationalists are the successors of the Catholic-hating Puritans, a sect that played an instrumental role in the founding of what became the Colony of Connecticut.
"Minister" Crebbin was followed by Rabbi Shaul Praver of Congregation Adath Israel in Newtown, an "unaffiliated" group of Talmudists who follow the "conservative tradition" (see Affiliation and Membership). He was joined on the auditorium's stage by a "Reverend" Mel Kawakami, senior minister of Newtown United Methodist Church, which, of course, follows the heretic John Wesley's brand of Protestantism. Mr. Kawakami was wearing a stole adorned with butterflies, which caused me at first to think that he was representing the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Having given Talmudism its due, the next false religion to be represented on stage was Mohammedanism. A little boy, Peter Graves, sang a Mohammedan hymn of some sort or another in the Arabic language before Muadh Bhavnagarwala of Al Hedaya Islamic Center in Newtown, who quoted from the blasphemous Koran at length to provide "wisdom" and "insight" from this "revealed" book, venerated by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI at the John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, District of Columbia, on Thursday, April 17, 2008, and shortly thereafter called "that dear book" when back in Rome.
The next dynamic duo of error to make their way up to the stage was that of John Woodall, who leads the local group of Bahais (I know that there there should be an apostrophe after the "a" an before the "i" in Baha'i; pardon me for not seeing fit to dignity this falsehood with its apostrophe when using the world in the plural case), a group of unfortunate souls who believe that there is a succession of teachers through the centuries, including Moses, Buddha, Mohammed and Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, whose goal is it has been to stress the "spiritual unity of mankind." Sort of sounds like an allocution given by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI about the importance of "religion" to fight the plague of "irreligion," a false approach that was specifically condemned as a threat to the Catholic Faith by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928:
Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty,
that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual
reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare
to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to
carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples
might be "one." And did not the same Christ will that His disciples
should be marked out and distinguished from others by this
characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all
men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"? All
Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much
more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a
serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and
prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and
others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually
repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and
scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have
grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are
directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying
doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so
actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a
number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very
many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a
union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother
Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring
sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these
enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which
the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Joining Mr. Woodall on stage was Leo McIlrath, who was described as the "ecumenical chaplain" of the Lutheran Home of Southbury, Connecticut, which is located to the northeast of Newtown.
This process of theological error and indifferentism, highlighted by one or two calls to "come together" despite religious differences, was then followed by a procession of pure naturalism.
Yes, yes, yes. The whole event was Judeo-Masonic.
However, Catholics do make distinctions, you understand.
The pro-abortion, pro-perversity Governor of the State of Connecticut, Daniel Malloy (where's Officer Pete Malloy from Adam-12?), who is perfectly good standing as a member of the counterfeit church of concilairism, spoke after Newtown First Selectman Patricia Llodra. Malloy then introduced the pro-abortion, pro-perversity President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, who had the temerity--and it was nothing other than that--to talk at length about the "obligation" of the people of the United States of America to "protect" "our children" despite the fact that he believes that our children can be dispatched via surgical and/or chemical means under the cover of the civil law if one or both of their parents "choose" to do so:
But we, as a nation, we are left with some hard
questions. Someone once described the joy and anxiety of parenthood as
the equivalent of having your heart outside of your body all the time,
walking around. With their very first cry, this most precious, vital
part of ourselves -- our child -- is suddenly exposed to the world, to
possible mishap or malice. And every parent knows there is nothing we
will not do to shield our children from harm. And yet, we also know
that with that child’s very first step, and each step after that, they
are separating from us; that we won’t -- that we can’t always be there
for them. They’ll suffer sickness and setbacks and broken hearts and
disappointments. And we learn that our most important job is to give
them what they need to become self-reliant and capable and resilient,
ready to face the world without fear.
And we know we can’t do this by ourselves. It comes as a
shock at a certain point where you realize, no matter how much you love
these kids, you can’t do it by yourself. That this job of keeping our
children safe, and teaching them well, is something we can only do
together, with the help of friends and neighbors, the help of a
community, and the help of a nation. And in that way, we come to
realize that we bear a responsibility for every child because we’re
counting on everybody else to help look after ours; that we’re all
parents; that they’re all our children.
And in that way we come to realize that we bear responsibility for
every child, because we’re counting on everybody else to help look after
ours, that we’re all parents, that they are all our children.
This is our first task, caring for our children. It’s our first job.
If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a
society, we will be judged.
And by that measure, can we truly say, as a nation, that we’re meeting our obligations?
Can we honestly say that we’re doing enough to keep our children, all of them, safe from harm?
Can we claim, as a nation, that we’re all together there, letting them know they are loved and teaching them to love in return?
Can we say that we’re truly doing enough to give all the children of
this country the chance they deserve to live out their lives in
happiness and with purpose?
I’ve been reflecting on this the last few days, and if we’re honest
with ourselves, the answer’s no. We’re not doing enough. And we will
have to change.
(Remarks by the Caesar at Sandy Hook Interfaith Prayer Vigil.)
Please pass me the Nux Vomica, Sharon, as I am in need of it now. (Yes, I actually got to the point of being physically sick while watching this display of blasphemy and sacrilege that is the direct result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protesant Revolution and then cemented in place by the welter of naturalistic myths that can be termed collectively as Judeo-Masonry. And I very rarely got that physically ill, still having at sixty-one years, sixteen days of age a cast iron stomach.)
Can you believe this hubris?
Can you believe this chutzpah?
Here is a man who has been indifferent to the murders of Americans caused by the Fast and Furious scandal that his hand-picked stooge and master protector of villains, United States Attorney General Eric Holder, has done everything imaginable to keep keep key documents out of the hands of the elected representatives of the people.
Here is a man who has presided over a systematic effort to cover-up the truth of the savage killings of Americans in Benghazi, Libya, on Tuesday, September 11, 2012, first to keep alive his administration's false narrative that Mohammedan terrorism had been "defeated" with the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on May 1, 2011, and recently simply to keep the facts from becoming public, being aided in this cover-up by a "concussion" that we are supposed to believe that a key witness who was about to testify before the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, a woman named Hillary Rodham Clinton, the United States Secretary of State, making her "unable" to undergo questioning under oath by her former colleagues in the United States Senate. Can anyone say Rose Law Firm billing records? (See Elusive Papers of Law Firm Are Found at White House, Hillary in Hiding, Hillary's First Scandal and A 30-Year Record of Hillary Clinton.)
Here is a man who is intent on forcing apparently Catholic institutions, each of which is in conciliar captivity at this time, and individual Catholic employers to provide health insurance coverage for contraception and other "family planning services," including the surgical dismemberment of innocent children, who are butchered by "respectable" pillars of the community under cover of the civil and with his full blessing and enthusiastic support.
Here is a man who supports one grave moral evil after another under cover of the civil law (chemical and surgical baby-killing and perversity, to name just two) while showing complete contempt and utter disregard even for the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America that are supposed to limit and provide checks upon an executive's exercise of power.
Here is a man who believes that he is above the law of God and man, believing that he can rule by executive decree along the lines of Hugo Chavez.
Keeping the children "safe," Mister President?
We must bear "responsibility" for every child, Mister President?
Love the children, Mister President?
Care for the children, Mister President?
You who support and fund with American taxpayer dollars the daily slaughter of the preborn, the silent, invisible victims of what can be called the American Genocide?
You dare to lecture us on "caring" for and "loving" children?
You who believe that a mother has a right to "choose" to "terminate" her pregnancy?
You who did not vote as a member of the Illinois State Senate to support the "born alive infant protection" act because you did not want to place "obstacles" on a woman's right to "choose" to kill her baby? Here's the record on this score as found in a well-researched article by Jill Stanek that was posted on her website in 2008:
Following are Obama’s actions and votes on Born Alive. The bill number changed every year it was reintroduced.
Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
Obama’s “no” vote in the IL Senate Judiciary Committee here, March 28, 2001
Transcript of Obama’s verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001, pages 84-90
Obama’s “present” vote on the IL Senate floor, March 30, 2001
Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
Transcript of Obama taking credit for Christ Hospital’s Comfort Room in the IL Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, March 5, 2002
Obama’s “no” vote in the IL Senate Judiciary Committee, March 6, 2002
Transcript of Obama’s verbal opposition to Born Alive on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002, pages 28-35
Obama’s “no” vote on the IL Senate floor, April 4, 2002
Listen to audio from Obama’s 2002 IL Senate floor debate wherein he argued that while
babies might be aborted alive, it would be a “burden” to a mother’s
“original decision” to assess and treat them.
Meanwhile, the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act with a “neutrality clause” added passed the U.S. Senate 98-0, the U.S. House overwhelmingly, and was signed into law August 5, 2002. The pro-abortion group NARAL expressed neutrality on the bill.
Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
Democrats took control of the IL Senate with the 2002 elections. This year Born Alive was sent to the Health & Human Services Committee, chaired by Barack Obama.
As can be seen on the vote docket,
Obama first voted to amend SB1082 to add the “neutrality clause” from
the federal version of Born Alive to the IL version to make them
absolutely identical. (DP#1 means “Do Pass Amendment #1.)
Then Obama voted against the identical version. (DPA means, “Do Pass as Amended.)
Additional corroboration of Obama’s vote: IL State Senate Republican Staff Analysis of SB 1082, March 12-13, 2003, bottom of page 2
For 4 years following his 2003 vote Obama misrepresented it, stating
the wording of the IL version of Born Alive was not the same as the
federal version, and he would have voted for it if so. As recently as August 16, 2008, Obama made this false assertion.
But when evidence presented was irrefutable, Obama’s campaign on August 18, 2008, admitted the truth to the New York Sun.
The nonpartisan group FactCheck.org has since corroborated Obama voted against identical legislation as
passed overwhelmingly on the federal level and then misrepresented his
vote. (Links to Barack Obama's votes on Illinois' Born Alive Infant Protection Act.)
This man, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, is giving citizens of the United States of America a lecture on keeping our children safe, of taking responsibility for them, of caring for and of loving them?
On full display, my friends: Every Americanist error imaginable.
Yet it is that many "people" accept the pro-abortion, pro-perversity caesar's words last evening as "soothing" and "reassuring" as he prepares to take the actions he believes are necessary to limit the access of ordinary Americans to gun ownership, which, of course, is but a prelude to Antichrist's taking them all away, something that God will permit in order show forth the magnificence of the triumph of Our Lady's Immaculate Heart once Russia is consecrated to it by a true pope with all of the world's true bishops. And anyone who thinks that we are not suffering from the errors of Russia having been spread into our midst as a result of the ethos of Protestant and Judeo-Masonry that is so celebrated in the United States of America is a fool. There is just no "nice" way to put this. I am sorry. A fool.
Obama/Soetoro once again took a stab at his alleged grasp of theology when he said the following near the end of his speech:
All the world’s religions -- so many of them represented
here today -- start with a simple question: Why are we here? What
gives our life meaning? What gives our acts purpose? We know our time
on this Earth is fleeting. We know that we will each have our share of
pleasure and pain; that even after we chase after some earthly goal,
whether it’s wealth or power or fame, or just simple comfort, we will,
in some fashion, fall short of what we had hoped. We know that no
matter how good our intentions, we will all stumble sometimes, in some
way. We will make mistakes, we will experience hardships. And even
when we’re trying to do the right thing, we know that much of our time
will be spent groping through the darkness, so often unable to discern
God’s heavenly plans.
There’s only one thing we can be sure of, and that is the
love that we have -- for our children, for our families, for each
other. The warmth of a small child’s embrace -- that is true. The
memories we have of them, the joy that they bring, the wonder we see
through their eyes, that fierce and boundless love we feel for them, a
love that takes us out of ourselves, and binds us to something larger --
we know that’s what matters. We know we’re always doing right when
we’re taking care of them, when we’re teaching them well, when we’re
showing acts of kindness. We don’t go wrong when we do that.
That’s what we can be sure of. And that’s what you, the
people of Newtown, have reminded us. That’s how you’ve inspired us.
You remind us what matters. And that’s what should drive us forward in
everything we do, for as long as God sees fit to keep us on this Earth.
“Let the little children come to me,” Jesus said, “and do not hinder them -- for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” (Remarks by the Caesar at Sandy Hook Interfaith Prayer Vigil.)
What gives our life meaning, Mister President, you utter ignoramus and blowhard?
The Catholic Faith. Nothing else.
How are we to live, Mister President, you shallow excuse of a national leader?
We have been created to know, to love and to serve God as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His Catholic Church in order to be happy with him for all eternity in Heaven by dying in a state of Sanctifying Grace as Catholics.
What is true love, Mister President, you who are filled with one empty, bubble-headed naturalist notion of rank sentimentality after another?
True love is an act of the will, Mister President.
God wills our good, the ultimate expression of which is salvation of our immortal souls as members of His Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be, as recent events keep proving, no true social order. We are not self-redemptive, Mister President.
No one loves or cares for another authentically if he says or does anything, whether by omission or commission, that interferes in any way with the sanctification and salvation of his immortal soul. Any other kind of "love" is nothing other than disordered self-love, disordered attachment to creatures based in sentimentality, not a true love of God as He has revealed Himself to us through His Catholic Church.
How scandalous it is, therefore, that the conciliar pastor of Saint Rose of Lima Church on Church Hill Road in Newtown, Connecticut, "Monsignor" "Bob" Weiss, mentioned nothing about the very instrument upon which God showed the depths of His love for us, the Holy Cross, from which He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem us.
How scandalous it is, therefore, that "Monsignor" "Bob" Weiss did not explain that there is nothing that any of us can suffer, not even the terrible tragedy that took place in Newtown, Connecticut, three days ago now, that is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins did to Our Lord in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion Death and that caused His Most Blessed Mother's Immaculate Heart to be pierced through and through with Swords of Sorrow.
How scandalous it is, therefore, that "Monsignor" "Bob" Weiss did not explain that Our Lady stands by the foot of the crosses being borne by the parents and other relatives and friends of the deceased at this time, that she holds them in the crossing of her arms and in the folds of her mantle, that she wants them to fly unto her through her Most Holy Rosary and by means of True Devotion to her as taught by Saint Louis Grignion de Montfort.
Ah, a conciliar pastor does not do such things at "interfaith prayer vigils," and therein lies one of the devil's greatest triumphs as he whispers into the ears of those who have a stage to refrain from being Catholic in order to appeal to "people of all faiths," especially by refusing to acknowledge the Holy Name of the Divine Redeemer, which Weiss never mentioned in his brief remarks, or His Holy Cross or the Holy Name of Mary, at whose mere mention the devil must take flight. How sad it is that a Lutheran, the "Reverend" Rob Morris, the pastor of Christ the King Lutheran Church in Newtown, Connecticut, invoked the Holy Name of the Divine Redeemer in a "benediction" given after Weiss spoke without mention the Name of Christ the King in his own remarks.
This is a far, far greater scandal than the fact that atheists have paid for a blasphemous billboard in Times Square in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, to invite those who believe in Our Lord to dump the 'myth'. What do you expect atheists to do? This is unsurprising in our land of "religious liberty" that has been so heralded this year by the conciliar "bishops" of the United States of America and is defended constantly by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
Conciliarists claim to be members of the Catholic Church. Yet it is that, having been formed in every error imaginable themselves, they reaffirm others in every error imaginable, choosing to prefer silence over a clear profession of the truths of the true Faith that they say they accept.
Then again, that is the point: These men simply are not Catholic, and thus it is that the likes of the products of Protestant and Talmudic and Mohammedan and other errors who spoke last night, including Obama/Soetoro himself, are considered to be "leaders" to whom people look for "comfort" and "support" in times of tragedies that are caused in large measure by the proliferation of error over five centuries now, especially during these past decades as the sacramentally barren rites of conciliarism have dried up the well-springs of Sanctifying and Actual Grace.
While we continue to pray for the happy repose of the souls of those killed in this most recent tragedy and for the needs of their relatives at this time, taking nothing at all away from the terrible loss that so many people have experienced, we must remember that Our Lord will not be mocked. A country that rejects His Social Reign over men and their nations is destined for the dust bin of history.
Let us be joyful, however, that we have reached the days of the O
Antiphons in the Sacred Liturgy. We are now in the seven liturgical days
leading up to Midnight Mass one week from tonight.
Let me turn to Dom
Prosper Gueranger's The Liturgical Year to explain why we have
embarked upon a period of joyful expectation as Advent draws to a close
and we can gather around the stable once again to welcome the Baby
Jesus, adoring Him with His Most Blessed Mother and His foster-father,
our Good Saint Joseph:
The Church enters to-day on the seven days which
precede the Vigil of Christmas, and which are known in the liturgy under
the name- of the Greater Ferias. The ordinary of the Advent
Office becomes more solemn; the antiphons of the psalms, both for Lauds
and the Hours of the day, are proper, and allude expressly to the great
coming. Every day, at Vespers, is sung a solemn antiphon, consisting of a
fervent prayer to the Messias, whom it addresses by one of the titles
given Him in the sacred Scriptures.
In the Roman Church, there are seven of these
antiphons, one for each of the greater ferias. They are commonly called
the O's of Advent, because they all begin with that interjection. In
other Churches, during the middle ages, two more were added to these
seven; one to our blessed Lady, O virgo virginum; and the other to the angel Gabriel, O Gabriel; or to St. Thomas the apostle, whose feast comes during the greater ferias; it began O Thoma Didyme. There were even Churches when twelve great antiphons were sung' that is, besides the nine we have just mentioned, O Rex Pacifice to our Lord, O mundi Domina to our Lady, and O Hierusalem to the city of the people of God.
The canonical Hour of Vespers has been selected as
the most appropriate time for this solemn supplication to our Saviour,
because, as the Church sings in one of her hymns, it was in the evening
of the world (vergente mundi vespere) that the Messias came amongst us. These antiphons are sung at the Magnificat,
to show us that the Saviour whom we expect is to come to us by Mary.
They are sung twice, once before and once after the canticle, as on
double feasts, and this to show their great solemnity. In some Churches
it was formerly the practice to sing them thrice; that is, before the
canticle, before the Gloria Patri, and after the Sicut erat.
Lastly, these admirable antiphons, which contain the whole pith of the
Advent liturgy, are accompanied by a chant replete with melodious
gravity, and by ceremonies of great expressiveness, though, in these
latter, there is no uniform practice followed. Let us enter into the
spirit of the Church; let us reflect on the great day which is coming;
that thus we may take our share in these the last and most earnest
solicitations of the Church imploring her Spouse to come, to which He at
O Sapientia, quae ex ore Altissimi prodiisti,
attingens a fine usque ad finem fortiter, suaviterque disponens omnia;
veni ad docendum nos viam prudentiae.
O Wisdom, that proceedest from the mouth of the
Most High, reaching from end to end mightily, and disposing all things
sweetly! come and teach us the way of prudence.
O uncreated Wisdom, who art so soon to make Thyself visible to Thy
creatures, truly Thou disposest of all things. It is by Thy permission
that the emperor Augustus issues a decree ordering the enrolment of the
whole world. Each citizen of the vast empire is to have his name
enrolled in the city of his birth. this prince has no other object in
this order, which sets the world in motion, but his own ambition. Men go
to and fro by millions, and an unbroken procession traverses the
immense Roman world; men think they they are doing the bidding of man,
and it is God whom they are obeying. This world-wide agitation has
really but one object; it is, to bring to Bethlehem a man and woman who
live at Nazareth in Galilee, in order that this woman, who is unknown in
the world but dear to heaven, and who is at the close of the ninth
month since she conceived her Child, may give birth to this Child in
Bethlehem; for the Prophet has said of Him: 'His going forth is from the
beginning, from the days of eternity. And thou, O Bethlehem! art not
the least among the thousand cities of Juda, for out of thee He shall
come.' O divine Wisdom! how strong art Thou in thus reaching Thine ends
by means which are infallible, though hidden; and yet, how sweet,
offering no constraint to man's free-will; and withal, how fatherly, in
providing for our necessities! Thou choosest Bethlehem for Thy
birth-place, because Bethlehem signifies the house of bread. In this,
Thou teachest us that Thou art our Bread, the nourishment and support of
our life. With God as our food, we cannot die. O Wisdom of the Father,
living Bread that hast descended from heaven, come speedily into us,
that thus we approach to Thee and be enlightened by Thy light, and by
that prudence which leads to salvation. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Volume I, Advent, pp, 484-485.)
Yes, this era of apostasy will
pass. When it does, my friends, rest assured that it will be the
working of the same Blessed Mother who brought forth her only Child at
Midnight in Bethlehem in piercing cold, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ. Her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart will triumph over the
apostasies and sacrileges and blasphemies and errors of the moment just
as that same Immaculate Heart of Mary was so filled with joy at the time
of the Nativity of her Son, Christ the King. We need to resolve during
these final days of Advent to make better preparation for our
celebration of Christmas this year, especially by praying as many
Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits and as we seek to make
reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, which was formed out of
her own Immaculate Heart, for our own sins and those of the whole world.
Let us keep close to Our Lady and Saint Joseph in
these final days of Advent as we ask them to protect us from the minions
of Modernity and Modernism who are, yes, each in their own way, serving
to accomplish the will of God now just as much as had Caesar Augustus
over two millennia ago.
O Wisdom, that proceedest from the mouth of the Most High, reaching from
end to end mightily, and disposing all things sweetly! come and teach
us the way of prudence.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
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.
See also: A Litany of Saints