Bernie Sanders Makes America Safer For Atheism

Although many Catholics believe that the First Amendment’s guarantee of “religious liberty” by means of the “free exercise of religion” clause was an important protection of their spiritual ancestors’ ability to practice the Faith openly without fear of state-sponsored persecution as had been the case in England and Ireland following King Henry VIII’s getting Parliament to pass the “supremacy act” that made him the “supreme head of the Church in England,” the truth is otherwise.

As has been stated on this site endless numbers of times, the First Amendment’s guarantee of the “free exercise of religion” and its prohibition against Congress establishing a state-recognized religion were designed by Protestants and free-thinking rationalists to purchase silence from Catholics about the Holy Faith in the “public square” in exchange for a “guarantee” of the their God-given right that no civil authority can deny them legitimately, namely, the duty that they owe Him to give Him public worship and honor in the Sacred Liturgy and in every aspect of their lives. Protestants and Judeo-Masonic “free-thinking” rationalists were so successful in this regard that most, although not all, Catholics in the United States of America were gradually converted in a manner of speaking to view the Holy Mother Church through the eyes of democracy and egalitarianism rather than viewing the world through the eyes of the Holy Faith.

The worldwide heresy that is "religious liberty" has most, although not all, of its origins right in the Constitution of the United States of America, specifically in the First Amendment, which was one of twelve amendments proposed by the First Congress, ten of which were ratified and became part of the Constitution on December 15, 1791. (An eleventh of those twelve amendments, forbidding any pay raise for members of the United States Congress from going into effect until an intervening election for members of the House of Representative, was ratified in 1992, becoming the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.) The First Amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

Gaggles of Americanist Catholics have tried to contend over the years that the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America affords Catholics with the opportunity to practice their Faith openly without any overt persecution from the Federal government, making this country a haven of "religious freedom" in contradistinction to the United Kingdom, which suppressed the Faith and imposed repressive measures upon Catholics on the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

Thus we see, as I have noted many times on this site, the cleverness of the devil in raising up "bad" Protestants, those who attacked the Faith and Catholics loyal to it with violent ferocity, in order to make "good" Protestants, those who were willing to "tolerate" Catholics, look better by comparison. Lost in this truly diabolical trap is the simple fact  placing the true religion on a level of equality with false religions makes it impossible for any religion to oppose the efforts of atheists or anti-Theists from asserting themselves in the "public marketplace of ideas." Irreligion becomes as good as religion. There is no rational, coherent basis by which one can oppose the spread of actual demonic "worship" or its variants, including witchcraft and the New Age "spiritualities," into every aspect of society. The First Amendment thus makes it far easier for the devil to snatch souls from the true Faith by making "religious liberty" or "religious freedom" into a protected "civil right" that no one can oppose lest he put into jeopardy the ability of his own religious denomination to practice its tenets freely.

Defenders of all things American, including self-styled Constitutionalists from the ranks of the multitude of heretical and/or schismatic Protestant sects, claim that the framers of the Constitution were not indifferent to religion, that they simply recognized that it would be impossible in a religiously pluralistic country to choose a "national" religion, preferring to leave the matter of established religions up to the state governments, which remained free to erect established churches prior to the application of various provisions of the Bill of Rights, which, as written, are only limitations upon the actions of the Federal government and not the state governments, to state governments by virtue of a twisted reading of the Fourteenth Amendment's "due process of law" clause from the time of Gitlow v. New York (1925) to our present day. The framers, these defenders of all things American argue, did not mean to exclude the expression of religious convictions from public life. The framers meant merely, we are told, to prevent the sort of "religious warfare" that had been common in Europe in the centuries before the American founding, which is why they, the framers, believed it inopportune to have a nationally established church of any kind.

There are, of course, many serious problems with these theses, starting with the fact that the "religious wars" in the two and one-half centuries leading up to the "founding" of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic United States of America were engendered by Protestantism. Many of them were fought between competing sects of Protestants, as was the case during the English Civil War between 1641 and 1649 as Anglicans and Puritans, the English followers of John Calvin who wanted to "purify" the Anglican Church founded by the lustful King Henry VIII of its remaining "Catholic" trappings (a "hierarchy," a "sacramental" system, veneration of Our Lady and a select number of other saints), fought each other (with a wide variety of motivations and goals), resulting in the overthrow and beheading of King Charles I. The framers of the Constitution of the United States of America had a warped, myopic view of history, being unwilling to look at the truth of the glory of the Middle Ages, summarized so succinctly by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

There was once a time when States were governed by the philosophy of the Gospel. Then it was that the power and divine virtue of Christian wisdom had diffused itself throughout the laws, institutions, and morals of the people, permeating all ranks and relations of civil society. Then, too, the religion instituted by Jesus Christ, established firmly in befitting dignity, flourished everywhere, by the favor of princes and the legitimate protection of magistrates; and Church and State were happily united in concord and friendly interchange of good offices. The State, constituted in this wise, bore fruits important beyond all expectation, whose remembrance is still, and always will be, in renown, witnessed to as they are by countless proofs which can never be blotted out or ever obscured by any craft of any enemies. Christian Europe has subdued barbarous nations, and changed them from a savage to a civilized condition, from superstition to true worship. It victoriously rolled back the tide of Mohammedan conquest; retained the headship of civilization; stood forth in the front rank as the leader and teacher of all, in every branch of national culture; bestowed on the world the gift of true and many-sided liberty; and most wisely founded very numerous institutions for the solace of human suffering. And if we inquire how it was able to bring about so altered a condition of things, the answer is -- beyond all question, in large measure, through religion, under whose auspices so many great undertakings were set on foot, through whose aid they were brought to completion. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.) 

Secondly, the framers of the Constitution of the United States of America, being the products of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and various combinations of errors emanating from the so-called "Age of Reason" or "Enlightenment," failed to understand the simple truth that God has rights above His contingent beings, that His Incarnation in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother changed everything about human history, that He established only one true Church upon the Rock of Saint Peter, the Pope, to be the means by which men can know order in their own lives individually and in the larger lives of their societies collectively. Anyone who rejects these simple truths, no matter his "good intentions," charts a course of utter destruction for himself and his fellow citizens. False ideas lead to bad consequences, inevitably and inexorably. Neither the wide variety of permutations coming under the aegis of Protestantism or the naturalist, anti-Incarnational philosophies of Judeo-Masonry can ever be the basis of personal or social order. Personal and social ruin are the only things that can result from false ideas, which Pope Leo XIII pointed out in Immortale Dei:

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God.

So, too, the liberty of thinking, and of publishing, whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrance, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountain-head and origin of many evils. Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. These remain ever one and the same, and are no less unchangeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption. Whatever, therefore, is opposed to virtue and truth may not rightly be brought temptingly before the eye of man, much less sanctioned by the favor and protection of the law. A well-spent life is the only way to heaven, whither all are bound, and on this account the State is acting against the laws and dictates of nature whenever it permits the license of opinion and of action to lead minds astray from truth and souls away from the practice of virtue. To exclude the Church, founded by God Himself, from the business of life, from the making of laws, from the education of youth, from domestic society is a grave and fatal error. A State from which religion is banished can never be well regulated; and already perhaps more than is desirable is known of the nature and tendency of the so-called civil philosophy of life and morals. The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals. She it is who preserves in their purity the principles from which duties flow, and, by setting forth most urgent reasons for virtuous life, bids us not only to turn away from wicked deeds, but even to curb all movements of the mind that are opposed to reason, even though they be not carried out in action. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.) 

As men are made by God to know, love and to serve Him as He has revealed Himself exclusively through His Catholic Church, which alone provides men with the means of their interior sanctification and is thus the sole means of human salvation, it opposed to the very Will of God to permit those who believe in false religions and false philosophies the "civil" right to propagate them openly. God does not want the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood deceived about First and Last Things. He wants all men and all nations to honor Him as their King, which is one of the lessons He was teaching us as Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar worshiped Him at the Epiphany. The Protestant and Judeo-Masonic and conciliarist notion of "religious liberty," having such tremendous roots in the Constitution of the United States of America, and of separation of Church and State thus are at odds with Divine Revelation itself, as Pope Saint Pius X noted in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.) 

The Modern, religiously indifferentist, anti-Incarnational civil state thus becomes a breeding ground for the propagation and multiplication of errors and heresies and blasphemies, none of which have any "civil" right to exist as they offend Our Lord and wound the souls for whom He offered up His life to the Father in Spirit and in Truth on the wood of the Holy Cross. Pope Gregory XVI elaborated on these points in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832:

Now We consider another abundant source of the evils with which the Church is afflicted at present: indifferentism. This perverse opinion is spread on all sides by the fraud of the wicked who claim that it is possible to obtain the eternal salvation of the soul by the profession of any kind of religion, as long as morality is maintained. Surely, in so clear a matter, you will drive this deadly error far from the people committed to your care. With the admonition of the apostle that "there is one God, one faith, one baptism" may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that "those who are not with Christ are against Him," and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore "without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate." Let them hear Jerome who, while the Church was torn into three parts by schism, tells us that whenever someone tried to persuade him to join his group he always exclaimed: "He who is for the See of Peter is for me." A schismatic flatters himself falsely if he asserts that he, too, has been washed in the waters of regeneration. Indeed Augustine would reply to such a man: "The branch has the same form when it has been cut off from the vine; but of what profit for it is the form, if it does not live from the root?"

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, Auguat 15, 1832.)

A civil state that is open to all religions and to irreligion is a manifestly dangerous place for souls. How can Mohammedans or Communists or Talmudic Jews or Freemasons or Socialists or Wiccans or Satanists be excluded from public office in such a system. They cannot, especially when one considers the words of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. 

Defenders of all things American contend that the "no religious test" clause permits Catholics, who had been disenfranchised in the United Kingdom and Ireland, to hold public office. Isn't that nice? What the "no religious test" clause of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States permits also is for atheists and deists and Freemasons and Mohammedans and Wiccans or anyone else to hold public office and thus to seek to use the civil laws as the means to enshrine their false beliefs. Once again, there is no rational, coherent basis to oppose the advances made by baby-killers and perverts when a civil government admits that there is no Divinely-instituted authority to which it must submit itself when the good of souls demands such submission. Everything contained in the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the natural law becomes negotiable. Everything. And given the fact that the devil never rests, those who seek to defend society in a non-denominational or even secular manner against various objective evils begin to look upon "compromise" as a sign of progress, thereby institutionalizing evil more and more by means of civil law and in the nooks and crannies of popular culture, a point made very tellingly by Pope Leo XIII in Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888:

But, to judge aright, we must acknowledge that, the more a State is driven to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection; and that the tolerance of evil which is dictated by political prudence should be strictly confined to the limits which its justifying cause, the public welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolerance would be injurious to the public welfare, and entail greater evils on the State, it would not be lawful; for in such case the motive of good is wanting. And although in the extraordinary condition of these times the Church usually acquiesces in certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true -- that the liberty which is claimed for all to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.

And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the equity and prudence of the Church are those who profess what is called liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which We have spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such an abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as being wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to lavish liberty on all in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant toward the Catholic Church, by refusing to allow her the liberty of being herself free. (Pope Leo XIII in Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888.) 

This is not a matter of ethereal speculation having nothing to with the real lives of human beings. Not at all. The heresy of religious liberty, which is at the heart of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, devastates souls. The belief that those who belong to false religions have a "civil right" to propagate themselves and that their false beliefs can contribute to the betterment of society make it impossible to exclude those false religions from making their presence felt everywhere in society, especially in "educational" institutions, where the tender souls of the young become ready prey to false ideas that are propagandized by charismatic professors. This is true in the United States of America and elsewhere in the allegedly "free" world of "democratic republics.

Case-in-point: the seventy-five year ol Jewish born Marxist atheist named United States Bernard John Sanders (D-Vermont, by way of Brooklyn, New York, originally).

“Bernie,” as he likes to be called, took President Donald John Trump’s nominee to serve as Deputy Director of the Office of Management and the Budget, Russell Vought, a Baptist, to task for having expressed support last year for the decision of officials at his baccalaureate alma mater, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois, to suspend a professor because of her beliefs that Mohammedans have a “relationship” with God, which, of course, they do not.

This is what Vought wrote in a publication called The Resurgent:

This is the fundamental problem. Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned. In John 8:19, “Jesus answered, ‘You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” In Luke 10:16, Jesus says, “The one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” And in John 3:18, Jesus says, “Whoever believes in [the Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” (httRussell Vought's Efforts to Preserve "Theological Clarity".)

Mr. Vought is indeed correct. Mohammedans do not know the true God of Divine Revelation because they deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and, of course, deny the existence of the Most Blessed Trinity.

There are two ironies about this.

First, the Baptist Vought holds to the invalidity of Mohammedanism whereas the supposed “Catholic,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio (aka Francis), commends each false religion and even atheism.

Second, however, Vought himself does not know the true God of Divine Revelation because he does not know Him as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through the Church that His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, founded upon the Rock of Saint Peter, the Pope. Despite his sincerity, Vought holds heretical beliefs about Divine Revelation and thus does not really know Our Lord or what He teaches to us through His Catholic Church.

Having noted these ironies, however, “Bernie” Sanders, the pro-abort, pro-perversity, self-described atheist from a Jewish background, had no business applying a religious test to Vought in full violation of the terms of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America. Sanders’ Christophobic bigotry is such that he presumes no one who believes that salvation is to be found in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, no less, of course, His true Church, can possibly treat people who deny Our Lord’s Sacred Divinity justly.

Here is the transcript of the exchange that Sanders had with Vought on Whit Wednesday, June 7, 2001, as fonnd an article written by a Calvinist, Todd Starnes, who does not realize that we are simply witnessing the ulitmate and inexorable consequences of the false Protestant and Judeo-Masonic principles of the American founding:

Sen. Sanders: "'Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned.' Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?"

Mr. Vought: "Absolutely not, Senator. I'm a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith...

Sanders: "...Forgive me, we just don't have a lot of time. Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned? Is that your view?"

Vought: "Again, Senator, I'm a Christian, and I wrote that piece in accordance with the statement of faith at Wheaton College..."

Sanders: "I understand that. I don't know how many Muslims there are in America. Maybe a couple million. Are you suggesting that these people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?"

Vought: "Senator, I'm a Christian..."

Sanders [shouting]: "I understand you are a Christian, but this country [is] made of people who are not just -- I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?"

Vought: "Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that's how I should treat all individuals..."

Sanders: "...Do you think that's respectful of other religions?... I would simply say, Mr. Chairman that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about." (Sanders Attacks Vought.)

In this regard, you see, Bernard John Sanders is showing us that militant atheism cannot coexist with any expression of religious belief, true or false, if such expression conveys disapproval of their beliefs or the beliefs of those who deny Our Lord’s Sacred Divinity. Anyone who puts into question the heresy of “universal salvation” or who believes that truth is to be found in one place and in none other is thus disqualified from holding public office.

Here is another irony:

Bernard John Sanders and others of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” believe that they are in possession of the truth about statism, income redistribution by means of the confiscatory taxing and economic regulatory powers of the civil state, the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn, the moral legitimacy of perverted practices (sodomy, lesbianism, the surgical mutilation of men to “become” women or women to “become” men), climate change, evolutionism, feminism, et al. Sanders and his ilk act as the high priests and priestesses of Modernity, believing that they alone are the true judges of who is considered “qualified” to hold public office and who is considered to be a “hater” for having the audacity to disagree with any of their preconceived falsehoods that they accept as true.

Sanders and his ilk are simply playing the same role at a time when Holy Mother Church is in the catacombs during the period of her mystical body as the minions of the Roman Empire played when she was in her infancy during the first three centuries.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori wrote that there were over eleven million Catholic martyrs between the time of the persecutions that had begun by Nero in the year 67 A.D. and the time that Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in the year 313 A.D. Among those who were martyred were four saints who were commemorated on the Feast of Saint John of San Facundo yesterday, Saints Basilides, Cyrinius, Nazarius, and Nabor:

Basilides, Cyrinus, Nabor, and Nazarius were Roman soldiers, of illustrious birth, and distinguished gallantry. Having embraced the Christian Religion, and being found publishing that Christ was the Son of God, they were arrested by Aurelius, Praefect of Rome under the Emperor Diocletian. As they despised his orders to sacrifice to the gods, they were committed to prison. While they were at prayer there, a brilliant light broke forth before the eyes of all that were there, and shone in all the prison. Marcellinus the keeper of the prison and many others were moved by this heavenly glory to believe in the Lord Christ. Basilides, Cyrinus, Nabor, and Nazarius were afterwards discharged out of the prison. However, in the reign of the Emperor Maximian, when they set light by his commands also, and had ever in their mouth that there is but one Christ, one God, and one Lord, they were tormented with whips loaded with metal, and again cast into chains. Thence, on the seventh day, they were brought out, and set before the Emperor, and there still persisted in mocking at the foolish idols, and declaring that Jesus Christ is God. They were accordingly condemned to death and beheaded. Their bodies were given to wild beasts to eat, but, as the creatures would not touch them, (Matins, The Divine Office, June 12.)

Although Bernard John Sanders is not demanding the life of Russell Vought, he is demanding for his political life, and for the political life of anyone who believes that Our Lord is the Divine Redeemer even though the person making this profession may hold heretical beliefs about Our Lord and His Divine Revelation. Sanders believes that those who are believing Christians of any kind are unfit for office, and in this, you see, he is playing the role of Diocletian himsef.

Let us be honest: the American founding was designed to make the United States of America safe for Talmudism, which the adversary himself had chosen long ago to be the his instrument of turning men into athesists, whether actual or practical, and their nations into instruments of persecuting those who dare to call evil by its name, and among the chief evils we face in the world today is the emboldening of Talmudists and their allies to determine who is “qualified” to participate in public life.

Ah, then again, of course, it is the Talmudists who have long called the shots in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Indeed, the march of militant atheism could not have been as successful as it has been had not the conciliar revolutionaries created a false religion that is designed to placate Talmudists by condemning “proselytism” and the very theoretical concept of a civil state that recognizes the Sacred Divinity of Christ the King and the authority of His true Church in all that pertains to the good of souls.

Indeed, one of the reasons that the founding of the United States of America has been celebrated by the likes of an endless array of Talmudists (Leo Strauss, the agnostic, Daniel Elazar, Morton Grodzins, Martin Diamond, Irving Kristol, et al.) is that it leaves no place whatsoever for any public honor—or even any reference made—to Christ the King and His true Church, a point that I made in article just about six years ago, Not A Mention of Christ the King. It matters not to Talmudists that Obama/Soetoro goes to a mosque as to exalt any religion other than Catholicism serves their purposes very nicely. There is room for every “religion” except the true one in the world of Modernity, just as there is room for every “religion” except the true one in the mind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and the in the doctrines of the false religion he propagates with great zeal while castigating those who, among a wide array of invectives, are said to “cage” or to “tame” the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost.

It is thus necessary to reiterate a simple point, quoted earlier in this commentary, that was made with such great eloquence by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

To hold, therefore, that there is no difference in matters of religion between forms that are unlike each other, and even contrary to each other, most clearly leads in the end to the rejection of all religion in both theory and practice. And this is the same thing as atheism, however it may differ from it in name. Men who really believe in the existence of God must, in order to be consistent with themselves and to avoid absurd conclusions, understand that differing modes of divine worship involving dissimilarity and conflict even on most important points cannot all be equally probable, equally good, and equally acceptable to God. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

That is, no matter the impossibility of having created a Catholic state in 1776 and 1787, the fact remains that the premise of a religious neutral civil state is false in and of itself and leads inevitably to the triumph of practical atheism over the course of time. Superstition and myth must take the place of the true religion in the lives of men and their nations when the true religion instituted by Christ the King Himself is ignored and despised as belonging to the age of the Crusades, which produced such great and valorous Catholic heroes who fought against the ruthless Mohammedans, and “The Inquisition,” whose "abuses" former President and current architect of the effort to effect a coup against his successor Barack Husein Obama/Barry Soetoro condemned at the 2015 version of the "National Prayer Breakfast. (These events are as predictable in their content as the annual "Happy Diwali," Happy Vesakh, "Happy Ramadan," Happy Yom Kippur" messages from the conciliar authorities. See Happy Vesakh, No, I Mean, Happy Diwali, Wait, Wait, Wait, Is It Ramadan Time Now?--Oops, Let's Try Again, Ah, Yes, Happy High Holy Days, Right? and Have a Happy.) Ignorance and absurdity must replace both supernatural and natural truth when men and their nations refuse to submit to the teaching authority and sanctifying offices of the Catholic Church.

We are simply witnessing the complete perfection of the inherent degeneracy of the founding principles in the person of Bernard John Sanders and the rest of the members of the organized crime family of the naturalist "left" just as surely as we are witnessing the inherent degeneracy of the “doctrines” and liturgical “renewal” and pastoral praxes of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. It is impossible to restore “order” on the basis of some compromise with error and falsehood.

Indeed, as Pope Leo XIII noted in A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902, the Catholic Church makes not terms with error at any time:

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which  it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

The anti-Incarnational lie of Americanism is the lie of Martin Luther and Judeo-Masonry all rolled into one, that is, the lie that the true Church must not be recognized by the civil state as its official religion. This is false, as I quoted Pope Saint Pius X's firm declaration in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, cited earlier in this article. This lie was also exploded by the late Louis-Edouard-François-Desiré Cardinal Pie, as can be see in this passage from Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie of Poitiers (which is available from Mr. Hugh Akin's Catholic Action Resource Center):

"If Jesus Christ," proclaims Msgr. Pie in a magnificent pastoral instruction, "if Jesus Christ Who is our light whereby we are drawn out of the seat of darkness and from the shadow of death, and Who has given to the world the treasure of truth and grace, if He has not enriched the world, I mean to say the social and political world itself, from the great evils which prevail in the heart of paganism, then it is to say that the work of Jesus Christ is not a divine work. Even more so: if the Gospel which would save men is incapable of procuring the actual progress of peoples, if the revealed light which is profitable to individuals is detrimental to society at large, if the scepter of Christ, sweet and beneficial to souls, and perhaps to families, is harmful and unacceptable for cities and empires; in other words, if Jesus Christ to whom the Prophets had promised and to Whom His Father had given the nations as a heritage, is not able to exercise His authority over them for it would be to their detriment and temporal disadvantage, it would have to be concluded that Jesus Christ is not God". . . .

"To say Jesus Christ is the God of individuals and of families, but not the God of peoples and of societies, is to say that He is not God. To say that Christianity is the law of individual man and is not the law of collective man, is to say that Christianity is not divine. To say that the Church is the judge of private morality, but has nothing to do with public and political morality, is to say that the Church is not divine."

In fine, Cardinal Pie insists:

"Christianity would not be divine if it were to have existence within individuals but not with regard to societies."

Fr. de St. Just asks, in conclusion:

"Could it be proven in clearer terms that social atheism conduces to individualistic atheism?"

Why is this so difficult to grasp and to accept?

We must fulfill Our Lady's Fatima Message in our own lives, praying our Rosaries and meditating upon the mysteries contained therein before her Divine Son's Real Presence. Our task is to do nothing less than to plant at least a few seeds for the restoration of the Catholic City, as Pope Saint Pius X exhorted us to do inNotre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:

This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations; they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the principles upon which the present Christian City rests.

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

Starting with the enthronement of our homes to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary in this month of June, making sure to pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through that same Immaculate Heart, keeping close to our own Guardian Angels and to Saint Michael the Archangel, may we plant a few seeds for a day when the forces of darkness will be vanquished and the bright light of Our King and the loving radiance of His Most Blessed Mother will have replaced all forms of naturalism, whether of the false opposites of the naturalist "left" or of the naturalist "right," with Catholicism as the one and only foundation of personal and social order.

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us,

Appendix A

Pope Pius IX on Modern Civilization: Taking A Different View Than the "Happy" Bishop

In truth, on the face of this earth there is but one true and holy Religion, founded and established by Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself; this Religion – the fecund mother, the nurturer of all virtues, the enemy of vice, the liberator of souls and the mistress of true happiness – is called Catholic, Apostolic and Roman.

We have already spoken about what we should think of those who live outside of this ark of salvation in the consistory allocution of December 9, 1854, and here we confirm that same doctrine. 

To those who, for the good of Religion, invite us to extend our hand to contemporary civilization, we ask whether the Vicar of Christ, divinely established by Christ to preserve the purity of His heavenly doctrine and to nourish and confirm His lambs and sheep in this same doctrine, could join forces with contemporary civilization without a very grave danger of conscience and causing the greatest of scandals. For it was this civilization that produced evils so numerous that we could never deplore them sufficiently, as well as so many poisonous opinions, errors and principles which are extremely opposed to the Catholic Religion and her doctrine. (Pius IX, Allocution Jamdudum cernimus, March 18, 1861, in Recueil des Allocutions consistoriales, encycliques et autres lettres apostoliques, Paris: Adrien Leclere, 1865, p. 435, found at  Pope Cannot Accept Modern Civilization.)

Appendix B

Pope Leo XIII on the Masonic Ethos of Toleration of False Religions: Condemning the Conciliar "Popes" and their "Bishops"

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

Appendix C

Pope Leo XIII on the Duties of Catholics to Defend Catholic Truth in Public: Generic Religiosity Has Nothing to Do with Fidelity to Christ the King

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 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.

The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

Appendix D

Pope Leo XIII on the Degeneration of Nations Absent the Catholic Faith: We Do Not Give Thanks for Religious "Diversity"

From this it may clearly be seen what consequences are to be expected from that false pride which, rejecting our Saviour's Kingship, places man at the summit of all things and declares that human nature must rule supreme. And yet, this supreme rule can neither be attained nor even defined. The rule of Jesus Christ derives its form and its power from Divine Love: a holy and orderly charity is both its foundation and its crown. Its necessary consequences are the strict fulfilment of duty, respect of mutual rights, the estimation of the things of heaven above those of earth, the preference of the love of God to all things. But this supremacy of man, which openly rejects Christ, or at least ignores Him, is entirely founded upon selfishness, knowing neither charity nor selfdevotion. Man may indeed be king, through Jesus Christ: but only on condition that he first of all obey God, and diligently seek his rule of life in God's law. By the law of Christ we mean not only the natural precepts of morality and the Ancient Law, all of which Jesus Christ has perfected and crowned by His declaration, explanation and sanction; but also the rest of His doctrine and His own peculiar institutions. Of these the chief is His Church. Indeed whatsoever things Christ has instituted are most fully contained in His Church. Moreover, He willed to perpetuate the office assigned to Him by His Father by means of the ministry of the Church so gloriously founded by Himself. On the one hand He confided to her all the means of men's salvation, on the other He most solemnly commanded men to be subject to her and to obey her diligently, and to follow her even as Himself: "He that heareth you, heareth Me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me" (Luke x, 16). Wherefore the law of Christ must be sought in the Church. Christ is man's "Way"; the Church also is his "Way"-Christ of Himself and by His very nature, the Church by His commission and the communication of His power. Hence all who would find salvation apart from the Church, are led astray and strive in vain.

As with individuals, so with nations. These, too, must necessarily tend to ruin if they go astray from "The Way." The Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of mankind, is King and Lord of the earth, and holds supreme dominion over men, both individually and collectively. "And He gave Him power, and glory, and a kingdom: and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve Him" (Daniel vii., 14). "I am appointed King by Him . . . I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession" (Psalm ii., 6, 8). Therefore the law of Christ ought to prevail in human society and be the guide and teacher of public as well as of private life. Since this is so by divine decree, and no man may with impunity contravene it, it is an evil thing for the common weal wherever Christianity does not hold the place that belongs to it. When Jesus Christ is absent, human reason fails, being bereft of its chief protection and light, and the very end is lost sight of, for which, under God's providence, human society has been built up. This end is the obtaining by the members of society of natural good through the aid of civil unity, though always in harmony with the perfect and eternal good which is above nature. But when men's minds are clouded, both rulers and ruled go astray, for they have no safe line to follow nor end to aim at. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)