Biden Banks on Baby Butchery to Keep His Nominal Job

Yesterday, Monday, January 22, 2024, the Feast of Saints Vincent and Anastasius, was the fifty-first anniversary of the dreadfully horrific decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton that, despite all protestation to the contrary, decriminalized the surgical execution of the innocent preborn from conception through all subsequent stages of a baby’s development within the sanctuary of his mother’s womb up to and including the day of birth. The Roe decision struck down laws in thirty-three states that either prohibited baby-killing entirely or had restricted the conditions under which babies could be butchered under cover of the civil law, thus representing both an assault upon the binding precepts of the Divine Positive and Natural Laws while serving as well as an exercise in raw jurisprudential positivism.

There is no need to belabor points that I have made a gazillion times before, especially in Beyond the Headlines: Making Catholic Sense of New Efforts to End Surgical Baby-Killing, The Supreme Masters of Sophistry: Unable to Admit the Fifth Commandment Exists (Combined Parts One and Two),  Roe v. Wade is Gone, Baby-Killing Will Continue, part one, Roe v. Wade is Gone, Baby-Killing Will Continue, part two, and Roe v. Wade is Gone, Baby-Killing Will Continue, part three. All that needs to be reiterated for present purposes is that no human being, whether actually individually or together with others in the institutions of civil governance, has any moral authority to repeal, alter or ignore the binding precepts of the Divine and Natural Laws.

Human law that contradicts the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law has no binding validity whatsoever, and Pope Leo XIII reminded us in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, that to resist such laws is our duty but to obey is a crime:

But, if the laws of the State are manifestly at variance with the divine law, containing enactments hurtful to the Church, or conveying injunctions adverse to the duties imposed by religion, or if they violate in the person of the supreme Pontiff the authority of Jesus Christ, then, truly, to resist becomes a positive duty, to obey, a crime; a crime, moreover, combined with misdemeanor against the State itself, inasmuch as every offense leveled against religion is also a sin against the State. Here anew it becomes evident how unjust is the reproach of sedition; for the obedience due to rulers and legislators is not refused, but there is a deviation from their will in those precepts only which they have no power to enjoin. Commands that are issued adversely to the honor due to God, and hence are beyond the scope of justice, must be looked upon as anything rather than laws. You are fully aware, venerable brothers, that this is the very contention of the Apostle St. Paul, who, in writing to Titus, after reminding Christians that they are "to be subject to princes and powers, and to obey at a word," at once adds: "And to be ready to every good work."Thereby he openly declares that, if laws of men contain injunctions contrary to the eternal law of God, it is right not to obey them. In like manner, the Prince of the Apostles gave this courageous and sublime answer to those who would have deprived him of the liberty of preaching the Gospel: "If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye, for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." (Pope Leo XIII, 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.

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. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

Pope Pius XII explained the necessity of resisting unjust laws throughout the course of his nineteen-year pontificate. Here are but two examples:

Everybody knows that the Catholic Church does not act through worldly motives, and that she accepts any and every form of civil government provided it not be inconsistent with divine and human rights. But when it does contradict these rights, Bishops and the faithful themselves are bound, by their own conscience to resist unjust laws. (Pope Pius XII, Allocution on the Cardinal Mindszenty Arrest, as found at: New York Times, February 15, 1949.)

26. We earnestly exhort “in the heart of Christ” (Phil. 1. 8) those faithful of whom We have mournfully written above to come back to the path of repentance and salvation. Let them remember that, when it is necessary, one must render to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and with greater reason, one must render to God what is God’s (Cf. Luke 20. 25). When men demand things contrary to the Divine Will, then it is necessary to put into practice the maxim of St. Peter: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5. 29). Let them also remember that it is impossible to serve two masters, if these order things opposed to one another (Cf. Matt. 6. 24). Also at times it is impossible to please both Jesus Christ and men (Cf. Gal. 1. 10). But if it sometimes happens that he who wishes to remain faithful to the Divine Redeemer even unto death must suffer great harm, let him bear it with a strong and serene soul.

27. On the other hand, We wish to congratulate repeatedly those who, suffering severe difficulties, have been outstanding in their loyalty to God and to the Catholic Church, and so have been “counted worthy to suffer disgrace for the name of Jesus” (Acts 5. 41). With a paternal heart We encourage them to continue brave and intrepid along the road they have taken, keeping in mind the words of Jesus Christ: “And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather be afraid of him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell . . . But as for you, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Therefore do not be afraid . . . Therefore everyone who acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I in turn will disown him before my Father in heaven” (Matt. 10. 28, 30-33). (Pope Pius XII, Ad Sinarum Gentes, October 7, 1954.)

Pope Pius XII also explained that nations not built upon the firm foundation of the Catholic Faith must wind up as places of injustice and iniquity:

4. If we weigh carefully the causes of today’s crises and those that are ahead, we shall soon find that human plans, human resources, and human endeavors are futile and will fail when Almighty God — He who enlightens, commands, and forbids; He who is the source and guarantor of justice, the fountainhead of truth, the basis of all laws — is esteemed but little, denied His proper place, or even completely disregarded. If a house is not built on a solid and sure foundation, it tumbles down; if a mind is not enlightened by the divine light, it strays more or less from the whole truth; if citizens, peoples, and nations are not animated by brotherly love, strife is born, waxes strong, and reaches full growth.

5. It is Christianity, above all others, which teaches the full truth, real justice, and that divine charity which drives away hatred, ill will, and enmity. Christianity has been given charge of these virtues by the Divine Redeemer, who is the way, the truth, and the life,[2] and she must do all in her power to put them to use. Anyone, therefore, who knowingly ignores Christianity — the Catholic Church — or tries to hinder, demean, or undo her, either weakens thereby the very bases of society, or tries to replace them with props not strong enough to support the edifice of human worth, freedom, and well-being.

6. There must, then, be a return to Christian principles if we are to establish a society that is strong, just, and equitable. It is a harmful and reckless policy to do battle with Christianity, for God guarantees, and history testifies, that she shall exist forever. Everyone should realize that a nation cannot be well organized or well ordered without religion. (Pope Pius XII, Meminisse Iuvat, July 14, 1958.)

We would never be arguing about the inarguable (the inviolability of innocent human life, the fact that there are only two genders, that the sin of Sodom and its related vices are abhorrent and can never enjoy the favor of the civil law nor be celebrated within civil society, etc.) in a country that recognizes the Sovereignty of Christ the King and that acknowledges the authority of the Catholic Church to interpose herself with the civil authorities in all that pertains to the good of souls after exhausting her Indirect Powers of teaching, preaching, exhortation, and admonition to warn such authorities of the consequences for defying the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.

A summary of the civil state’s duty to pursue the common temporal good in light of man’s Last End—the possession of the glory of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven) was provided to us by Pope Saint Pius X 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. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. “Between them,” he says, “there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.” He proceeds: “Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them…. As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error.  (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1905.)

These passages summarize the correct relationship between Holy Mother Church and the civil state, and they note the Holy Father’s bitterness at seeing the trust that Pope Leo XIII had placed in the French anti-clericalists shattered shortly after he, Pope Saint Pius X, had ascended to the Throne of Saint Peter. Pope Saint Pius X manfully articulated right principles while at the same time enumerating the specific ways in which the leaders of the French Third Republic were attempting to subjecting everything about the life of the Church in France to their own arbitrary anticlerical decrees.

Alas, we are consigned to arguing about the inarguable and of having mere mortals send other mere mortals to jail for seeking to defend innocent human life as long as nations remain not only indifferent to the religion but, as a consequence, become hostile to those who merely seek to defend the Natural Law without even mentioning the Divine Law. Those seeking to oppose evil on merely natural grounds will forever be straitjacketed into endless confrontations with those who believe that falsehood trumps truth and that sentimentality trumps reason.

Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929, explained that:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.) 

Governments that are “religiously neutral,” however, must end up awash in a sewer of evil as men, especially today given the paucity of a superabundance of Sanctifying and Actual Grace caused by the sacramentally barren liturgical rites of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, govern themselves and their nations by means of sentimentality or raw majoritarian impulses. Such governmental systems must place jurists who might know better into making one legal argument after another, no matter how constitutionally or statutorily sound, on a purely naturalistic basis, thus placing into straitjackets from which it is impossible to extricate themselves. One cannot fight naturalism/secularism/humanism with naturalism/secularism/humanism. One can only fight naturalism/secularism/humanism with Catholicism, Nothing.

While we pray for the conversion of all those who solicit, perform, cooperate in, or support the chemical and/or surgical execution of the innocent preborn, we also have a duty to remind those in public life who enable these executions of the very direct words written by Pope Pius XI about their fate when they stand before the Avenger of innocent blood when they die:

Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)

It is no act of “violence” upon anyone to call abortion by its proper name: homicide in the particular and genocide in the universal sense.

Yet is that Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr, the Trojan Horse in the White House, and his equally incompetent vice president, Kamala Harris, use each anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decisions in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton to bewail the overturning of a completely manufactured constitutional “right” in the case of Thomas Dobbs, Mississippi State Health Office v. Jackson Women’s Organization, June 24, 2022, and to vow to protect non-reproductive “rights.” There is even an entire page on the White House website to highlight this commitment to the protection of one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, willful murder: Reproductive Rights.

This is what the mentally-challenged, physically decrepit, morally and politically corrupt octogenarian despot who loves to suppress domestic opposition and to use the full force of the Federal law enforcement authorities to intimidate opponents into silence, especially about the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn, said yesterday, Monday, January 22, 2024, on the fifty-first anniversary of the issuance of Roe v. Wade:

Fifty-one years ago today, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make deeply personal decisions with her doctor—free from the interference of politicians. Then, a year and a half ago, the Court made the extreme decision to overturn Roe and take away a constitutional right. As a result, tens of millions of women now live in states with extreme and dangerous abortion bans. Because of Republican elected officials, women’s health and lives are at risk. In states across the country, women are being turned away from emergency rooms, forced to go to court to seek permission for the medical attention they need, and made to travel hundreds of miles for health care.

Even as Americans—from Ohio to Kentucky to Michigan to Kansas to California—have resoundingly rejected attempts to limit reproductive freedom, Republican elected officials continue to push for a national ban and devastating new restrictions across the country. 

On this day and every day, Vice President Harris and I are fighting to protect women’s reproductive freedom against Republicans officials’ dangerous, extreme, and out-of-touch agenda. We stand with the vast majority of Americans who support a woman’s right to choose, and continue to call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe in federal law once and for all. (Statement from President Joe Biden on the 51st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade.)

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., has been mouthing these shibboleths for fifty-one years after he put his finger to the wind and decide to follow the siren call of the “people” in support of the chemical and surgical execution of innocent preborn children. There are three simple points to be made about this pathetic statement.

First, Roe v. Wade was the “extreme” decision. The Dobbs decision was hardly “extreme” as it corrected a grievous judicial error, though, only to compound it by concluding that the “people,” acting through their state legislative assemblies or popular ballot initiatives, can “decide” that which does not belong to mere mortals to decide. The correct decision in Dobbs would have been to rule that the inviolability of innocent human life from conception through all subsequent stages is protected by the Fifth Amendment against Federal infringement and by the Fourteenth Amendment against infringement by state governments. Dobbs did not do that, and thus surgical baby-killing continues.

Second, no one has the right to “choose” to kill an innocent human being. No human being is ever morally free to do that which is prohibited by the binding precepts of the Divine and Natural Laws.

Third, it is absolutely irrelevant what “overwhelming majorities” of voters in Ohio, Kentucky, Kansas, and Michigan “decide” about baby-killing in various referenda on the issue.

There is no moral liberty to do that which is wrong.

Civil law must conform to the Divine and Natural Laws.

Contrary to what naturalists who label themselves as "liberals" or "libertarians" or even many "conservatives" contend, such things as baby-killing, whether chemical or surgical or both, or perverse sins against nature cannot be made "legal" by a decision or a court or by a legislative enactment or executive order or by a plebiscite to reflect "the will of the people," which is considered by many naturalists, especially the libertarians, as the "will of God" that must govern legislative enactments. In other words, human beings are demigods who are "free" to act as they desire, with a few exceptions here and there, of course, as long as the "will of the people" is observed. Naturalists of the liberal bent believe that judges and other potentates can do what they want no matter what the "people" may desire.

This is all erroneous as contingent beings who did not create themselves and whose bodies are destined one day for the corruption of the grave until the General Resurrection of the Dead on the Last Day do not "determine" moral truth any more than they determine the physical laws of nature.

The law of gravity cannot be "repealed" by a decision of a judge or of a president or of a government or a mayor.

The law of gravity cannot be "repealed" by a majority vote of a human legislature or the majority vote of the "people" in a plebiscite (a referendum on a particular issue that is put to the voters at a general or a special election for their approval or rejection, sometimes originating as a result of legislative initiative or state constructional mandate and sometimes originating as a result of a grass roots petition drive to place a particular question on the ballot, which is called an "initial." one of the "good government" reforms of the Progressive Era). It is also true that the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law cannot be repealed by the pronouncement of any judge, executive, legislative or popular enactments. All of this means nothing to the reprobate named Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., who has been up for sale since he sold his soul to the devil fifty-one years ago this year to support the nonexistent “right’ of a woman to kill their preborn babies under cover of the civil law by claiming to oppose abortion “privately” but had an “obligation” to support it as an elected representative of the “people,” a sophism of the sort that was anticipated and condemned by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

Hence, lest concord be broken by rash charges, let this be understood by all, that the integrity of Catholic faith cannot be reconciled with opinions verging on naturalism or rationalism, the essence of which is utterly to do away with Christian institutions and to install in society the supremacy of man to the exclusion of God. Further, it is unlawful to follow one line of conduct in private life and another in public, respecting privately the authority of the Church, but publicly rejecting it; for this would amount to joining together good and evil, and to putting man in conflict with himself; whereas he ought always to be consistent, and never in the least point nor in any condition of life to swerve from Christian virtue. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

It is a relatively easy thing to sell out one’s country for personal gain after one has broken the vows of his Baptism and Confirmation by seeking after public approval, career success, and financial gain in full defiance of the words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul? (Matthew 16: 26)

Truth to be told, of course, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.’s lack of personal virtue, which is a legitimate issue to raise in the course of public debate as to lack virtue is make oneself vulnerable over time to having a complete contempt for the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law, the Natural Law and the just laws of men and their nations, dates back at least as far as his days at Syracuse Law School in the 1960s, where he first demonstrated his penchant for plagiarism, and blossomed into full demagoguery by the time he had been elected to the United States Senate in 1972, and he has been enabled and emboldened throughout his wretched half-century in public life by various conciliar priests/presbyters, bishops (valid and invalid), and by the sixth in the current line of antipopes, none other than Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — After their much-anticipated meeting in the Vatican, President Joe Biden said to reporters Pope Francis had told him to “keep receiving Communion,” despite the politician’s continued, public support for abortion and LGBT ideology.

Biden asserted that the pontiff “was happy I’m a good Catholic,” and that the president should “keep receiving Communion.” (BREAKING: Pro-abortion Joe Biden says Pope Francis told him to 'keep receiving Communion'.)

This is very interesting.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not a Catholic. He is a heretic who has mocked the truths of the Holy Faith, blasphemed both Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Most Blessed Mother, and who has enabled hardened sinners aplenty in the name of “accompaniment.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio hates believing Catholics. He hates Catholic doctrine. He even hates the fact that there is a conciliar code of canon law. It thus natural for him to call a reprobate supporter and enabler of the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means to be a “good Catholic.” Bergoglio would have called Martin Luther and Henry VIII “good Catholics” if he had met them after their break from the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.

Although it is a slogan that used to be featured on bumper stickers during the days of the “pro-life” “pope,” Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, it is worth repeating once again that “No One Can Be Catholic and Pro-Choice.” Even that slogan is a misnomer as no one has the right from God to choose to do what is evil. One has the ability to do what is evil. However, no one has the moral authority to do so. No one is morally free to choose to sin, and it is an excommunicable sin to support the slaughter of the innocent preborn, whether by surgical or chemical means, and it is also a sin to support the sin of Sodom or to enable it in any manner whatsoever.

Wait.

It gets worse:

The 75-minute, private meeting was described by Biden as “wonderful,” a word which was echoed by his wife in her own comments made to the press, before meeting French first lady Brigitte Macron in Rome.

Pope Francis and Biden met Friday, October 29, in a much-hyped meeting, as media outlets speculated whether the Pope would speak to Biden about his staunchly pro-abortion position.

Early press releases from both the White House and the Holy See Press Office briefly noted that the conversation revealed around the “world’s poor,” as well as the “climate crisis” and issues regarding COVID-19 and refugees.

Biden “thanked His Holiness for his advocacy for the world’s poor and those suffering from hunger, conflict, and persecution,” stated the White House. “He lauded Pope Francis’ leadership in fighting the climate crisis, as well as his advocacy to ensure the pandemic ends for everyone through vaccine sharing and an equitable global economic recovery.”

‘Keep receiving Communion’

As for whether the issue of abortion came up during the meeting, Biden said “it didn’t.” (BREAKING: Pro-abortion Joe Biden says Francis told him to 'keep receiving Communion'.)

Interjection Number One:

Anyone who thought that Jorge Mario Bergoglio would speak to Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., about abortion is living in as much a fantasy world as those thought that the Argentine Apostate was going to speak to Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro about the American genocide of the preborn when the two met at the Vatican on March 27, 2013, the Feast of Saint John Damascene, and again on Wednesday, September 23, 2013, the Feast of Pope Linus I and the Commemoration of Saint Thecla. Indeed, both the Biden White House and the Vatican made it clear in advance that the matter would not be addressed when the two apostates met today, and it is thus absolutely no surprise that they talked about climate change and “global vaccine sharing” without mentioning a word about slaughter of the preborn.

For all of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s chatter now and again about terrible abortion is, the practical truth is that he does not believe that those who support it in public life, whether Catholic or non-Catholic, are disqualified from holding any office of public trust, whether elected or appointed.

The late Dr. Charles E. Rice, one of the foremost contemporary defenders of the Natural Law, who was a professor of law at Fordham University and then at Notre Dame Law School for over four decades, elaborated on the disqualification of pro-aborts to hold public office in an article he wrote for The Wanderer on August 27, 1998, at a time that a sincere associate editor of that newspaper was running against then United States Senator Alfonse M. D’Amato for the senatorial nomination of the New York State Right to Life Party:

Sen. D'Amato will face a pro-abortion Democratic opponent in the fall. While a voter could morally vote for a pro-abortion candidate who is less objectionable on abortion than his opponent, he should not. The tactic of voting for the less objectionable of two pro-abortion candidates is a tactic of incremental surrender. The incremental strategy of accepting the legalization of abortion in some cases concedes that some innocent human life is negotiable after all. The pro-death movement is a guaranteed winner against an opposition that qualifies its own position by conceding that there are some innocent human beings whom it will allow to be directly and intentionally killed. That approach in practice has mortgaged the pro-life effort to the interests and judgment of what Paul Johnson called "the great human scourge of the 20th century, the professional politician." (Modern Times, 1985, p. 510.)

When a politician says he favors legalized abortion in life of the mother, rape and incest, or other cases, he affirms the nonpersonhood of the unborn child by proposing that he be subjected to execution at the discretion of another. The politician's pro-life rhetoric will be drowned out by the loud and clear message of his position, that he concedes that the law can validly tolerate the intentional killing of innocent human beings. Apart from exceptions, of course, Sen. D'Amato is objectionable as well for some of his other stands on abortion and for his positions on other issues, including especially the homosexual issue.

Pro-lifers could increase their political impact if they were single-issue voters, treating abortion as an absolutely disqualifying issue. Any candidate who believes that the law should treat any innocent human beings as nonpersons by tolerating their execution is unworthy to hold any public office, whether President, trustee of a mosquito abatement district, or senator. (Dr. Charles E. Rice, "Pro-Life Reflections on Sen. D'Amato, The Wanderer, August 27, 1998.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes not a word of this of course, and thus he is perfectly content to let the likes of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi send themselves to hell, along with himself, I should add, as one of the duties of a man who thinks himself to be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter is to admonish the sinner, while they sing the same old “I am personally opposed to abortion but can’t impose my views on others” canard that Biden himself was among the first to sing back in 1973 following the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, January 22, 1973.

Emboldened by his “pope” and enabled by men such as Wilton Gregory, Joseph Tobin, John Stowe, and Blase Cupich, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is banking that his unrepentant, full-throated and unconditional support for baby-butchery under cover of the civil law will be his meal ticket back to the White House on November 5, 2024. The election, such as the farce is, of course, is not decided on the basis of the national popular vote total but on the electoral vote count, and in this regard, it should be remembered that only seven states will decide this year’s presidential election: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

Biden is banking that there are just enough pro-abort voters in these seven states to make for him to deny his likely opponent, former President Donald John Trump, who is, of course, a supporter of ”‘exceptions” to the inviolability of innocent human life and of the homosexual agenda (see Memorandum to Donald John Trump: The Inviolability of Innocent Human Life is Non-Negotiable), the states that he needs to take back the White House, and the First Grifter may very well be correct, and the blame for this would rest principally with the conciliar “bishops” and “popes” who let him continue his career as a pro-abort go without any action being taken against him. This conciliar policy of malign neglect has been replaced by Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s openness to all his fellow Catholics who have as little regard for the place of moral truth in public life as he has for Catholic Faith, Worship, and Morals.

Some might argue that we have do “what we can” to retard evils, making whatever compromises in the practical order of things that appear to be justified by the circumstances, including voting for odious candidates who will not only not retard evils but will make sure that they become more and more institutionalized and as they themselves become willing enablers and accomplices in the growth of the “soft” totalitarianism of the modern police state.

There is nothing that I can write that will dissuade people form believing what they want to believe. 

As one who has followed politics since the presidential election of 1956 when I was five years of age and who has made its study my life’s work as a college professor, writer and speaker, I know all too well that the trajectory of degeneration that has occurred in the past sixty-eight years despite all of the most well-intentioned efforts to “stop” this or that boogeyman or to oppose or to support this or that Congressional legislation. Futility awaits those who put their hopes in the ability of naturalists to combat the evils that are caused by naturalism.

Pope Leo XIII was very clear on this one point:

The Church, it is certain, at no time and in no particular is deserted by God; hence, there is no reason why she should be alarmed at the wickedness of men; but in the case of nations falling away from Christian virtue there is not a like ground of assurance, "for sin maketh nations miserable." If every bygone age has experienced the force of this truth, wherefore should not our own? There are, in truth, very many signs which proclaim that just punishments are already menacing, and the condition of modern States tends to confirm this belief, since we perceive many of them in sad plight from intestine disorders, and not one entirely exempt. But, should those leagued together in wickedness hurry onward in the road they have boldly chosen, should they increase in influence and power in proportion as they make headway in their evil purposes and crafty schemes, there will be ground to fear lest the very foundations nature has laid for States to rest upon be utterly destroyed. Nor can such misgivings be removed by any mere human effort, especially as a vast number of men, having rejected the Christian faith, are on that account justly incurring the penalty of their pride, since blinded by their passions they search in vain for truth, laying hold on the false for the true, and thinking themselves wise when they call "evil good, and good evil," and "put darkness in the place of light, and light in the place of darkness." It is therefore necessary that God come to the rescue, and that, mindful of His mercy, He turn an eye of compassion on human society.  (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

Men today, blinded and made miserable by their own sins, do indeed lay hold on the false for the true and consider themselves very wise when they call "evil good, and good evil" and "put darkness in the place of light, and light in the place of darkness."

Total trust in the Mother of God and her Fatima Message as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits to console the good God and to make reparation for our own sins, each of which has worsened both the state of the world-at-large and the state of the Church Militant here on earth in this time of apostasy and betrayal.

We must pray today to Saint Raymond Penafort, whose feast day this is, to help ransom us from our own slavery to sin and worldliness so that we can pray to Our Lady more purely and be more confident, without being presumptuous, of her maternal intercession and protection now, and at the hour of our death.

Our Lady of the Rosary, 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.

Saint Raymond of Penafort, pray for us.

Saint Emerentiana, pray for us.

Saint Ildefonsus, pray for us.