Studied Silence, False Hopes
Thomas A. Droleskey
Among the most egregious blasphemies to have been committed by a conciliar "pontiff" in the past fifty years took place in the very city where the forty-fourth President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama, was sworn in yesterday to succeed George Walker Bush, Washington, District of Columbia.
The date of this particular blasphemy was Thursday, April 17, 2008. The location of this particular blasphemy was the "John Paul Cultural Center," which is located near the grounds of The Catholic University of America. The nature of this particular blasphemy involved the man who believes himself to be, albeit falsely, the Vicar of Christ on earth, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI personally esteeming the symbols of five false religions (Talmudic Judaism, Mohammedanism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism) with his own priestly hands. This was an action that offended the honor and majesty of God greatly as it violated directly the First Commandment and gave scandal to His little ones in the process.
God loathes each and every false religion. He wants each and every false religion eradicated from the face of this earth as its adherents are converted to the true Faith and worship Him in Spirit and in Truth in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as members of the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order. This, of course, has meant nothing to the late Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II or to his successor as the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, both of whom have shown esteem to false religions and have praised their nonexistent "ability" to "contribute" to the betterment of nations and to "peace" among them.
The reaction to Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's egregious blasphemy of Thursday, April 17, 2009, one of the many he has committed as the latest in the line of the conciliar antipopes, was scandalous in and of itself. Many voices amongst traditionally-minded Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism were quite muted. Some were simply dumb, uttering not a sound of protest about the blasphemy or raising not their voice even one little peep in defense of the honor and majesty and glory of God. Ratzinger/Benedict's trip to the United States of America, which included also the excommunicable offense (according to the Canon Law of the Catholic Church) of entering into a Talmudic synagogue, the Park East Synagogue, in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, on Friday, April 18, 2008, was actually praised in spite of the blasphemies he included, in spite of the fact that he uttered not a single word about the Mother of God or her Most Holy Rosary in any of his public events (including Novus Ordo services at Nationals Park in Washington, D.C., Saint Patrick's Cathedral in New York City, and Yankee Stadium in the Borough of The Bronx, New York) after three brief references to her in the Crypt Church of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception during a vespers service with the American conciliar "bishops" on Wednesday, April 16, 2008.
Behaving like many of us had done during much of false "pontificate" of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, many traditionally-minded Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism pretended as though the blasphemies committed by Ratzinger/Benedict either did not take place or that they were not all that "important" in the larger "scheme" of things, choosing "silence" about them in order to emphasize the "positive." Too bad if God is blasphemed in the process. Too bad.
There is a reason for this calculated silence that offends God: Ratzinger/Benedict had issued Summorum Pontificum on July 7, 2007, thereby co-opting many, although not all, traditionally-minded Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, into at least restraining their voices about things that would have caused them to bellow mightily and endlessly during the years of Wojtyla/John Paul II. Even the fact that the very premises of Summorum Pontificum are based upon falsehoods (that the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition) has been rationalized by at least a few who are attached to the "Motu Mass" as a "necessity" (Ratzinger/Benedict just "had" to distort the truth in order to appeal to the conciliar "bishops" who are opposed to any version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition). "Papal" deceit was thus justified as a necessity.
Ratzinger/Benedict knew full well that Summorum Pontificum would engender opposition from the ranks of some of his conciliar "hierarchy." He was willing to pay that price in order to neutralize "opposition" voices with the small but formerly vocal traditional community in the conciliar structures, wanting to demonstrate to the bishops and the priests of the Society of Saint Pius X that there was a place for them in the conciliar structures alongside the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, Focolare, The Neocatechumenal Way, Cursillo, the Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, among many others, including, of course, the existing "Motu" communities, whose priests are absolutely deaf, dumb and blind in the face of blasphemies and sacrileges and an almost ceaseless, daily reiteration of conciliar apostasies (attacks against the nature of dogmatic truth, elegies of praise for religious liberty and separation of Church and state and false ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue and the precepts of Ratzinger's New Theology that were condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950).
Ratzinger/Benedict has also endeavored to effect "unity" with the heretical and schismatic Orthodox bishops by authorizing Walter "Cardinal" Kasper, the President of the "Pontifical" Council for Promoting Christian Unity, to supervise the negotiation of what is called The Ravenna Document, which would, in essence, wipe away those dogmatic decrees of the Second Millennium, especially those regarding Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility issued by the [First] Vatican Council, that represent a "stumbling block" for the Orthodox. The outline provided in The Ravenna Document matches that found in Joseph Ratzinger's Principles of Catholic Theology almost identically:
It remains for the question of the role of the bishop of Rome in the communion of all the Churches to be studied in greater depth. What is the specific function of the bishop of the “first see” in an ecclesiology of koinonia and in view of what we have said on conciliarity and authority in the present text? How should the teaching of the first and second Vatican councils on the universal primacy be understood and lived in the light of the ecclesial practice of the first millennium? These are crucial questions for our dialogue and for our hopes of restoring full communion between us.
We, the members of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, are convinced that the above statement on ecclesial communion, conciliarity and authority represents positive and significant progress in our dialogue, and that it provides a firm basis for future discussion of the question of primacy at the universal level in the Church. We are conscious that many difficult questions remain to be clarified, but we hope that, sustained by the prayer of Jesus “That they may all be one … so that the world may believe” (Jn 17, 21), and in obedience to the Holy Spirit, we can build upon the agreement already reached. Reaffirming and confessing “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4, 5), we give glory to God the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who has gathered us together. (The Ravenna Document.)
How, then are the maximum demands to be decided in advance? Certainly, no one who claims allegiance to Catholic theology can simply declare the doctrine of primacy null and void, especially not if he seeks to understand the objections and evaluates with an open mind the relative weight of what can be determined historically. Nor it is possible, on the other hand, for him to regard as the only possible form and, consequently, as binding on all Christians the form this primacy has taken in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. . . .
After all, Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida, in the same bull in which he excommunicated the Patriarch Michael Cerularius and thus inaugurated the schism between East and West, designated the Emperor and the people of Constantinople as "very Christian and orthodox", although their concept of the Roman primary was certainly far less different from that of Cerularius than from that, let us say, of the First Vatican Council. In other words, Rome must not require more from the East with respect to the doctrine of primacy than had been formulated and was lived in the first millennium. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 198-199)
Ratzinger/Benedict believes that it is possible to "finesse" certain points of "doctrine," which, after all, he contends are formulated in merely contingent terms according to the historical circumstances at the moment of their formulation (the inspiration of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, being discounted as one of those "historically conditioned" factors that change over the course of time), in order to effect "unity" among disparate groups within and without the confines of his counterfeit church of conciliarism. It is possible to "disagree," amiably, of course, on certain points of doctrine as various rooms are built to hold the disparate elements of this One World Church. There is even a place in Ratzinger's One World Church for a most open agent of that One World Church, Father Hans Kung, with whom he, as Benedict XVI, had a cordial four-hour meeting over dinner on Monday, September 26, 2005.
Traditionally-minded Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism are expected to swallow hard to accept things that they are know are offensive to God and injurious to the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem. After all, the "pope" has issued Summorum Pontificum. Silence is the order of the day. Everything is going to "work out" in the end. We don't have to concerned about blasphemies and sacrileges and apostasies. We just need to have beautiful liturgies simulated mostly by the non-ordained as we bury our heads in the sands as to the simple fact that the Catholic Church cannot at all give us any of these things. "Everything else" will "come back" in due course, right?
Obviously, the fact that groups with different "visions" of the Faith can coexist under one ecclesiastical roof should prove the counterfeit nature of the conciliar church and that it is pointless to give it a moment's worth of credibility. No true Successor of Saint Peter could even privately hold the views that have been held and expressed quite publicly by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and remain a member of the Catholic Church in good standing. Pope Leo XIII made it abundantly clear in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, that agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of the perfect concord amongst men that is to be found exclusively in the Catholic Church:
Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which is the first of those bonds which unite man to God, and whence we receive the name of the faithful - "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. iv., 5). That is, as there is one Lord and one baptism, so should all Christians, without exception, have but one faith. And so the Apostle St. Paul not merely begs, but entreats and implores Christians to be all of the same mind, and to avoid difference of opinions: "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms amongst you, and that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment" (I Cor. i., 10). Such passages certainly need no interpreter; they speak clearly enough for themselves. Besides, all who profess Christianity allow that there can be but one faith. It is of the greatest importance and indeed of absolute necessity, as to which many are deceived, that the nature and character of this unity should be recognized. And, as We have already stated, this is not to be ascertained by conjecture, but by the certain knowledge of what was done; that is by seeking for and ascertaining what kind of unity in faith has been commanded by Jesus Christ. . . .
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).
The need of this divinely instituted means for the preservation of unity, about which we speak is urged by St. Paul in his epistle to the Ephesians. In this he first admonishes them to preserve with every care concord of minds: "Solicitous to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. iv., 3, et seq.). And as souls cannot be perfectly united in charity unless minds agree in faith, he wishes all to hold the same faith: "One Lord, one faith," and this so perfectly one as to prevent all danger of error: "that henceforth we be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive" (Eph. iv., 14): and this he teaches is to be observed, not for a time only - "but until we all meet in the unity of faith...unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ" (13). But, in what has Christ placed the primary principle, and the means of preserving this unity? In that - "He gave some Apostles - and other some pastors and doctors, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ" (11-12).
It is just too much for most Catholics to even consider the possibility that the friendly, grandfatherly priest from Germany is a figure of Antichrist as he engages in acts that millions of Catholics gave up their lives rather than to even give the appearance of accepting. Ratzinger/Benedict has made a modernized version of the Mass of the ages "accessible," we are told, to more Catholics, and the rest just has to be "tolerated" in order to take advantage of the "benefits" of Summorum Pontificum.
Summorum Pontificum, however, was not designed to restore the Catholic Faith. It was designed to co-opt traditionally-minded Catholics attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to accustom them to accept the ethos of conciliarism without much in the way of complaint. Father Basil Meramo of the Society of Saint Pius X in Mexico recognized this in late-2007:
The attempt to reconcile the New Mass with the Traditional Mass is the first step in his plan to bring about a reconciliation between the teachings of Vatican II and the True Faith. He cannot permit a rupture or separation to remain, which would impede his dialectic synthesis, for, as he declared when he was Cardinal Ratzinger: "For the life of the Church, it is dramatically urgent that a renewal of the liturgical conscience take place that will recognize once again the unity of the history of the liturgy and will understand Vatican II not as a rupture, but as a moment of development" (ibidem). It now becomes clearly manifested what was the real motivation behind the recognition of the fact that the Traditional Missal was never abrogated. It is s the well-known one step backward/two steps forward strategy.
It would be naïve to think that Benedict XVI has taken these measures because he is moving closer to the Traditional Mass and the True Faith. For according to his own words, the aim of these measures is the consolidation and legitimization of the New Mass and of Vatican II. He is attempting this not through brutal and dramatic measures that break with the past, but by using the method of a subtle and gradual evolution [as "Fr." Ratzinger did at Vatican II], he hopes to reconcile and convince all of the opponents of Vatican II and of the New Mass of their legitimacy.
Benedict XVI is proceeding gently, yet firmly, to establish that the New Mass and Vatican II do not constitute a break with the past, either liturgically or doctrinally, but rather that they are the fruit of an organic growth and development within the Church and must be accepted by all of the faithful. Therefore, the Traditional Mass is the expression of an historical past, and the New Mass is the faithful expression of the vital present and the promise of an even more glorious future.
One cannot conceive of a more subtle, clever, and intelligent maneuver that clearly intends to eliminate the forces that compose the Catholic resistance to the innovations and that defend the Traditional Mass and doctrines of the Catholic Church. This elimination is to take place without any dramatic clashes or brutal confrontations, as was attempted in the past, but rather with a warm oecumenical embrace, which will not leave behind any rotting corpses that could mar the irenic and bucolic scenery. This is not how one proceeds in our democratic age, for now we destroy by dialectic substitution. (February 2008 Commentaries on Traditio)
Ratzinger/Benedict himself has told us in Principles of Catholic Theology that "integralists" attached to the "past" cannot be resisted too firmly:
Among the more obvious phenomena of the last years must be counted the increasing number of integralist groups in which the desire for piety, for the sense of mystery, is finding satisfaction. We must be on our guard against minimizing these movements. Without a doubt, they represent a sectarian zealotry that is the antithesis of Catholicity. We cannot resist them too firmly. (Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 389-390)
Without anything other than wishful thinking to support their hopes, so many traditionally Catholics in the conciliar structures disregard Ratzinger's writings and the roadmap that he has given us to his strategies. Many, although not all, are willing to be silent in the face of apostasy and betrayal and blasphemy, oblivious to what Pope Leo the Great wrote of such silence in his own day:
But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great.)
Well, what is true in the realm of the counterfeit church of conciliarism is true also in the realm of civil politics and government in the United States of America. Another figure of Antichrist, Barack Hussein Obama, has been sworn in as the forty-fourth President of the United States of America. Despite his support for the killing, both by chemical and surgical means, of the innocent preborn under cover of law and his acceptance of most of the agenda of those steeped in unnatural acts in violation of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, it appears that somewhere between seventy to eighty percent of Americans look with "hope" upon his new administration. The fact that he supports evils that offend God and injure souls and thus wound the common temporal good of our country means nothing to these star struck admirers. There are, after all, we are told, "other" issues facing the country. He, Obama, means "well," doesn't he?
Antichrist is not going to come with horns and a tail. He is not going to announce himself as Antichrist. He is going to be attractive in appearance and appealing in his demeanor. His speech will be inspiring. He will appeal to the naturalistic ideals of "brotherhood" and "responsibility" and "common purpose" as he tries to seek "common ground" with opponents. He will be charming to a fault. He will be able to convince and inspire the masses. It will be quite difficult for those who see through his sincere embrace of Judeo-Masonic ideals to make themselves heard or to convince even some of their friends and associates of the dangers posed by smooth, empty rhetoric uttered by a man who does not believe that adherence to the Deposit of Faith entrusted exclusively by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to the Catholic Church is absolutely necessary for personal and social order. Charm and "conviction" will deceive many who have been taught to trust in the near "salvific" nature of politics and public policy. It will take the use of our Catholic reason aided by Sanctifying Grace to recognize, resist and oppose Antichrist.
President Barack Hussein Obama, a product of the Marxist-based Alinsky community organizing groups and of the bare-knuckles politics of the Cook County Democrat Party machine, went to extraordinary lengths prior to his inauguration yesterday to cultivate individuals who had been opposed to him. He dined with several prominent neoconservative columnists. He feted the man he defeated on November 4, 2008, for the Presidency of the United States of America, United States Senator John Sidney McCain III, the night before his inauguration.
President Obama chose a prominent New Age evangelical "minister," Rick Warren, the pastor of the ultra-wealthy Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Orange County, California, to give the invocation prior to his inauguration, pleasing evangelical Protestants no end. Like Ratzinger/Benedict, Obama was willing to take some heat from his supporters among the ranks of those committed to the commission of unrepentant acts against nature by inviting Warren so as to build more "bridges" to the evangelical Protestant community for his re-election campaign in the year 2012, which is just, eegads, three years from now.
Obama's Vice President, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is a Catholic who is held in high regard by many conciliar "bishops" and "priests" despite his support for the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. His Secretary of State-designate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was the woman he defeated, albeit barely, for the Democrat Party presidential nomination last year. His National Security Advisor, General James L. Jones, U.S.M.C., had served on the campaign team of Senator McCain. His Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, has been held over from the administration of former President George Walker Bush. There is just a little something for everyone in Obama's nascent administration. And I do not believe that it is at all beyond the realm of possibility for Obama to make an appearance tomorrow, January 22, 2009, to seek to address those assembled on the Capitol Mall on Fourth Street in Washington, D.C., for the annual March for Life to proclaim that he wants to find "common ground" with those who oppose abortion.
Indeed, Obama's naturalistic "vision" for the United States of America is quite in accord with the simple fact that this country is the first truly post-Catholic country in the world, the first country in the history of the world without a state religion, the first country in the world where a "diversity" or plurality of philosophical and religious beliefs was considered to be a strength and not a sign of an inherent, if not fatal, weakness. The failure of repeated appeals made by one President of the United States after another to the naturalistic, Judeo-Masonic, religiously indifferentist and semi-Pelagian spirit to "improve" the country means nothing to those who are "true believers" in the American way of naturalism and human self-redemption.
Consider the similarities between this passage from President Ronald Wilson Reagan's first inaugural address on January 20, 1981, and the one that follows from President Obama's inaugural address from yesterday:
On the eve of our struggle for independence a man who might have been one of the greatest among the Founding Fathers, Dr. Joseph Warren, President of the Massachusetts Congress, said to his fellow Americans, "Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of.... On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important questions upon which rests the happiness and the liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves."
Well, I believe we, the Americans of today, are ready to act worthy of ourselves, ready to do what must be done to ensure happiness and liberty for ourselves, our children and our children's children.
And as we renew ourselves here in our own land, we will be seen as having greater strength throughout the world. We will again be the exemplar of freedom and a beacon of hope for those who do not now have freedom. (First Inaugural Address of Ronald Wilson Reagan.)
For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends--honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism--these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility--a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
This is the source of our confidence--the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.
This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed--why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.
So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:
"Let it be told to the future world ... that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive ... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."
America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations. (Inaugural Address of Barack Obama)
Ronald Reagan said that Americans had to "renew" themselves. This is nothing other than semi-Pelagianism, the belief that we can more or less stir up graces within ourselves in order to be virtuous. Despite their apparent differences on the margins of naturalism, the late Ronald Reagan and Barack Hussein Obama expressed their fervent belief in the ability of the American people to "rise" to the occasion to "solve" the problems facing them. This is, after all, part of the naturalistic American creed.
Indeed, Obama made explicit reference to the existence of a plurality of religious creeds as a strength of the United States of America rather than what it is: a manifestation of the devil's plan to neutralize the true Faith in order to force Catholics to accept false creeds as having a legitimate place in the "market place" of ideas according to the heresy of religious liberty:
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus--and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
Common humanity? That, good readers, is Judeo-Masonry. It is Catholicism alone that is the true basis of human self-identification founded on the supranationality of the Faith itself. Pope Pius XI made this clear in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922:
Since the Church is the safe and sure guide to conscience, for to her safe-keeping alone there has been confided the doctrines and the promise of the assistance of Christ, she is able not only to bring about at the present hour a peace that is truly the peace of Christ, but can, better than any other agency which We know of, contribute greatly to the securing of the same peace for the future, to the making impossible of war in the future. For the Church teaches (she alone has been given by God the mandate and the right to teach with authority) that not only our acts as individuals but also as groups and as nations must conform to the eternal law of God. In fact, it is much more important that the acts of a nation follow God's law, since on the nation rests a much greater responsibility for the consequences of its acts than on the individual.
When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.
There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail.
It is apparent from these considerations that true peace, the peace of Christ, is impossible unless we are willing and ready to accept the fundamental principles of Christianity, unless we are willing to observe the teachings and obey the law of Christ, both in public and private life. If this were done, then society being placed at last on a sound foundation, the Church would be able, in the exercise of its divinely given ministry and by means of the teaching authority which results therefrom, to protect all the rights of God over men and nations.
Everything else is a lie from the devil. No amount of smooth rhetoric from a figure of Antichrist can make lies turn into truth. Catholicism alone is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ did not commission the Apostles to establish the pluralist civil state. He commissioned them to convert men and their nations to the true Faith. How sad, tragically sad, it is that even believing Catholics do not understand or accept this as they listen to empty naturalistic rhetoric with admiration and a shrug of their shoulders, believing that naturalism will "work" "this time" when it is nothing other than from the devil and designed to continue to sow the seeds of discord and chaos.
To believe that any brand of naturalism--or that generic references to "God"--can secure a nation and advance the common temporal good is madness, as Pope Pius IX noted in Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864:
But, although we have not omitted often to proscribe and reprobate the chief errors of this kind, yet the cause of the Catholic Church, and the salvation of souls entrusted to us by God, and the welfare of human society itself, altogether demand that we again stir up your pastoral solicitude to exterminate other evil opinions, which spring forth from the said errors as from a fountain. Which false and perverse opinions are on that ground the more to be detested, because they chiefly tend to this, that that salutary influence be impeded and (even) removed, which the Catholic Church, according to the institution and command of her Divine Author, should freely exercise even to the end of the world -- not only over private individuals, but over nations, peoples, and their sovereign princes; and (tend also) to take away that mutual fellowship and concord of counsels between Church and State which has ever proved itself propitious and salutary, both for religious and civil interests.
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."
And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that "the people's will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right." But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests?
No, it is never easy or pleasant to have to kick against the goad, to throw water on those awash with enthusiasm for the Judeo-Masonic farce that is American electoral politics and public policy, to point out that the new Caesar has no more clothes than the one who left town in disgrace for the moral harm that he did to this country at home and overseas. Our Catholic duty requires us to kick against the goad, as Pope Leo XIII noted in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890:
But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: "Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.'' To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: "Have confidence; I have overcome the world." Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.
Pope Pius XI exhorted us in similar terms in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925:
We firmly hope, however, that the feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.
Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights.
A Catholic ignores these exhortations in behalf of Christ the King at the peril of losing his immortal soul for all eternity.
As I noted yesterday in We Wait for Another, We Wait for Christ the King-- and as I will never cease noting for the next four years or until I am called by God to my Particular Judgment (if it should occur before January 20, 2013), no one who supports and then authorizes by virtue of his own executive powers the direction, intentional killing of even one human being under any circumstances under cover of law is fit to hold any office of public trust at any time for any reason whatsoever. Leaving aside all subjective culpability, something that is known to God alone, or the sincerity of his intentions, any man, including President Barack Hussein Obama, who supports and authorizes the killing of innocent human beings is an enemy of God
Common to the silence that greets many of the blasphemies committed by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and the admiration of President Barack Obama's "charm offensive" that is attempt to build bridges across the vast expanse of the naturalist divide is a belief that "strategy" will win the day, that a strategic silence about esteeming false religions or a regrettable concession that abortion is "here to stay" will help to realize "more important" goals in the future. Such beliefs are delusional, and they have been condemned by more than one pope and denounced with especial firmness by Saint Alphonsus de Liguori:
And when there is question of the divine honour, we should not be frightened by the dignity of the man who offends God; let us say to him openly: This is sinful; it cannot be done. Let us imitate the Baptist, who reproved King Herod for living his brother's wife and said to him: "It is not lawful for thee to have her"--Matt., xiv. 4. Men indeed shall regard us as fools, and turn us into derision; but, on the day of judgment they shall acknowledge that they have been foolish, and we have shall have the glory of being numbered among the saints. They shall say: "These are they whom we had some time in derision. . . . . We fools esteemed their life madness, and their end without honour. Behold how they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints"--Wis., v. 3, 4, 5. (Sixth Sunday After Easter: On Human Respect.)
Today is the Feast of Saint Agnes, the Patroness Saint of the diocese where I grew up and have spent about two thirds of my life, the Diocese of Rockville Centre on Long Island. Saint Agnes preferred death than than to sin. We must prefer death and dishonor rather than to be accounted among those who believe that men such as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI who esteem false religions and deny the very nature of dogmatic truth (which is nothing other than a denial of the nature of God Himself) and men such as Barack Hussein Obama who believe in the mystical dismemberment of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the persons of innocent preborn children under cover of law are not enemies of God to be pitied as we pray for their conversion to the true Faith.
Who cares if we are held to be of no account in the world? What matters if that we, despite our past sins and present failings, remain faithful to the true Faith by cooperating with the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross that flows into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. We must follow the pathways of the saints.
We have to fear only one thing: dying in a state of Final Impenitence. The petty potentates of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and of civil governments will pass from the scene soon enough. Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will indeed triumph in the end. We simply need to be about the business of clinging to true bishops and true priests in the catacombs who make no concessions to conciliarism or to the nonexistent legitimacy of its false shepherds as we make reparation for our sins by praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, offering the fruit of our prayers and sacrifices and mortifications and humiliations to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
There will be a day when all men and all women will be united in the Catholic Faith. There will be a day when all nations, including the United States of America, will acknowledge Christ the King. May it be our privilege to use the circumstances of the present moment, which God has known from all eternity would occur, to plant a few seeds as the consecrated slaves of Christ the King through the Immaculate Heart of Mary for the day when all voices, including those of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Barack Hussein Obama, will exclaim:
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Agnes, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints