Well, well, well.
The hint that the pro-abortion Communist junior United States Senator from the State of Illinois, Barack Hussein Obama, gave a few days ago about having a "sparring partner" for a vice presidential running mate turned out to be quite telling. Although there is no one with whom a "President" Obama would find himself at odds with, if only on the basis of pure personal ambition, more fully than with a "Vice President" Hillary Rodham Clinton and the president-in-exile she would bring in tow with her, it appeared to me a few days ago that Obama was describing none other than the pro-abortion Catholic senior United States Senator from the State of Delaware, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., now completing his thirty-sixth year as a member of the United States Senate.
Gee, think of the money I could make as a "talking head" analyzing the whys and wherefores of the twists and turns of our Judeo-Masonic political system if I wasn't possessed of that inconvenient little notion called the Social Reign of Christ the King and wasn't committed to promoting the Catholic Faith as the only foundation of personal and social order. (That money, however, would be fool's gold if I forsook a commitment to Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen for public prominence and as a means of supporting my family.)
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is a poster boy for how the heresy of Americanism has trumped Catholicism in the minds of Catholics, both clergy and laity alike, here in the United States of America. Biden, who was sworn in as the junior United States Senator from Delaware on January 3, 1973, just a short while after his wife and infant daughter were killed an automobile accident, was initially pro-life when he ran for the Senate in 1972 against incumbent Republican Senator J. Caleb Boggs. That did not last long. Biden became a full-throated supporter of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United Stats of America (SCOTUS) in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, January 22, 1973, that overturned the laws of forty-four state legislatures that forbade or restricted the surgical dismemberment of preborn children in their mothers' wombs. Biden and fellow United States Senator, Edward Moore Kennedy (D-Massachusetts), were among the first Catholic officials in public life to "switch" their positions from pro-life to pro-death, finding that they did not jeopardize their standing within the counterfeit church of conciliarism that presents itself to the world yet as the Catholic Church.
Indeed, Biden and Kennedy became among the first to parrot the approach to the surgical dismemberment of innocent preborn children under cover of law that was enunciated by then United States Representative Hugh Leo Carey (D-Brooklyn, New York) in his campaign for the Governorship of New York against then Governor Malcolm Wilson, who opposed abortion but nevertheless signed the State of New York's 1970 law permitting surgical killing in the first twenty-four weeks of pregnancy when serving as Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York at a time when the then Governor, the egregious Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, was out of the state. Carey helped to popularize the phrase "I'm personally opposed but abortion but cannot 'impose' my concept of morality' upon others" approach that Biden and Kennedy and Carey's own protege, one Mario Matthew Cuomo, who said in a debate in Albany, New York, on August 25, 1974, when he was running an unsuccessful primary race to be Carey's lieutenant governor running mate that he would have voted against that 1970 abortion bill had he been in the New York State Legislature at the time, were among the many Catholics in public life who forsook the truth for a lie, choosing to serve as enablers of the assassinations of millions upon millions of innocent preborn children.
Biden has "refined" his position over the years. He did opposed the conditional, partial ban on the procedure known as "partial-birth" abortion in 1999 and 2003, something that might have qualified him as being "pro-life" in the judgment of the Republican sycophants who run the various political action committees associated with the National Not-So-Right to Life Committee (which supports the execution of children under cover of law in cases where it is alleged that a mother's life is in danger and which takes no position against the chemical abortion of children by means of various abortifacient pills and devices) and its state affiliate committees.
Remember, my friends, former United States Representative Richard "Rick" Lazio (R-West Islip, New York) was considered "good enough" by the New York State Right to Life Committee despite his being fully supportive of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Roe v. Wade. It was "good enough" that Lazio was opposed to the conditional, partial ban on partial-birth abortions. Biden says now that he favors a policy of "abortion neutrality," that is, that the civil law should never prohibit nor endorse the taking of innocent preborn human life.
Biden's sophistry in this regard has been supported, at least in a de facto manner, by all manner of Catholic clergy. Biden has been particularly close to the Oblates of Saint Francis de Sales, at whose invitation he spoke at Allentown College of Saint Francis de Sales in April of 1980 as I was completing my one and only year of teaching there. Biden was unwilling to examine his obligation as a Catholic to oppose the mystical dismemberment of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the persons of preborn children when I questioned him on the matter during the question-and-answer forum that followed his presentation. One student of mine, a young man named Timothy Coleman, said, "That's the only reason I came here tonight, to see you take on Biden on abortion." Biden was, of course, nonplussed. He was thoroughly supported by my chairman at the time, Father Bernard Donohue, O.S.F.S., who had invited Biden to speak at the then named Allentown College, which is now called DeSales University.
Biden was thus in the first generation of Catholics attached to the agency of naturalism known as the Democrat Party to escape relatively unscathed from the officialdom of the counterfeit church of conciliarism despite his support for chemical and surgical baby-killing. It was because the conciliarist bishops, most of whom at the time were indeed genuine bishops consecrated prior to the change of Annibale Bugnini's 1968 rite of episcopal non-consecration, enabled that first generation of Catholics in public office who were members of the Democrat Party that some Catholics attached to the agency of naturalism known as the Republican Party began to realize that they could put the exigencies of their own careerist expediency above fidelity to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural as these have been entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ exclusively to the Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication and maintain their own "good standing" as "Catholics." (See Bob Dole, part trois, which examines the cases of George Pataki, Susan Molinari, Rick Lazio, Susan Collins, Tom Ridge, Richard Riordan, Rudolph Giuliani, who is, I think that I have heard, addressing the Republican National Convention in Saint Paul, Minnesota, during the week of September 1, 2008, and Arnold Schwarzenegger)
Yes, of course, there have been some conciliar officials who have taken the Catholic pro-aborts in public life to task, and this is to their credit as far as it goes. As I have noted endlessly on this site, however, the very fact that the taking of innocent preborn human life is at all "on the table" as an issue in civil law and public policy is the direct result of the overthrow of Social Reign of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen that has been wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry. Abortion, as horrible a crime as it is as one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, is but the symptom of the rise of the naturalistic, religiously-indifferentist (and/or anti-Incarnational) and semi-Pelagian modern civil state with which the counterfeit church of conciliarism has made its "reconciliation." The conciliar officials who have opposed Catholic pro-aborts in public life fail to realize that the pluralism endorsed and protected by the Constitution of the United States of America is what makes it possible for the public promotion of evil under the aegis of "freedom of speech" that was condemned by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832:
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?
The Church has always taken action to destroy the plague of bad books. This was true even in apostolic times for we read that the apostles themselves burned a large number of books. It may be enough to consult the laws of the fifth Council of the Lateran on this matter and the Constitution which Leo X published afterwards lest "that which has been discovered advantageous for the increase of the faith and the spread of useful arts be converted to the contrary use and work harm for the salvation of the faithful." This also was of great concern to the fathers of Trent, who applied a remedy against this great evil by publishing that wholesome decree concerning the Index of books which contain false doctrine."We must fight valiantly," Clement XIII says in an encyclical letter about the banning of bad books, "as much as the matter itself demands and must exterminate the deadly poison of so many books; for never will the material for error be withdrawn, unless the criminal sources of depravity perish in flames." Thus it is evident that this Holy See has always striven, throughout the ages, to condemn and to remove suspect and harmful books. The teaching of those who reject the censure of books as too heavy and onerous a burden causes immense harm to the Catholic people and to this See. They are even so depraved as to affirm that it is contrary to the principles of law, and they deny the Church the right to decree and to maintain it. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
Thus it is that even those conciliar officials who want to criticize the likes of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., are shackled by the constraints of their own Americanism and their false church's wretched "reconciliation" with the false principles of naturalism that flow so abundantly there from.
In reality, however, the conciliar officials who oppose Catholic pro-aborts in public life such as Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., are relatively small in number. Most of the conciliar officials are actually as "proud" of "one of our own" as all but a handful of Catholics were forty-eight years ago when then Senator John Fitzgerald Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) appeared to have been "elected" to the Presidency of the United States of American in what was, in all reality, an election stolen, largely with the help of then Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson (D-Texas) and the Catholic Mayor of the City of Chicago, Illinois, the late Richard J. Daley, from then Vice President Richard Mihous Nixon. Oh, yes, any Catholic who supported Nixon over the "Catholic" Kennedy was considered somewhat suspect in Catholic parishes.
Believe me, I know.
Coming from a rock-ribbed naturalistically "conservative" Republican household, I carried no brief for John Kennedy when I was in fourth grade at Saint Aloysius School in the Fall of 1960. I had typed a four page letter on a toy typewritten to Vice President Nixon to explain what I was support him over Senator Kennedy. Nixon's note, which I realize now was probably not written by him, to me was something that I treasured for many years. Sister Inez Marie, R.S.M., my fourth grade teacher, was not pleased at my showing her Nixon's letter, grunting a little bit before she told me to return to my desk. And my late mother, the late Norma Florence Red Fox Droleskey, made no friends at Saint Aloysius Church when she told another mother on November 9, 1960, the day after Kennedy's "victory," that Kennedy had stolen the election and that he did not represent the Catholic Faith. (My mother really didn't understand the Faith. However, she had a very good ability to sense phonies, and she knew that the Kennedys were concerned only about the power and the influence of politics, not about the promotion of the Faith. And my father, the late Dr. Albert Henry Martin Droleskey, had clients of his veterinary practice who were Secret Service agents who discussed some of the unreported activities of Kennedy that began to come to light fifteen years later with the revelations of the late Judith Exner Campbell.)
For most Catholics, however, the election of John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1960 represented the "arrival" of Catholics as "legitimate" members of American society. The late Democrat party activist turned journalist Tim Russert wrote in a book about his father the latter had the following to say when he, young Tim Russert, then ten years of age, asked him why he was support Kennedy over Nixon. "Because he's one of us," the senior Russert replied.
One of us?
No, no Catholic who supports the promotion of sin, the very thing that caused the God-Man to suffer so fearfully in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and caused His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to be pierced through and through with Seven Swords of Sorrow, is "one of us." John Kennedy was not "one of us." Joe Biden is not "one of us."
Americanism has such a strong hold on the minds of Catholics in the camps of the false opposites of the naturalist "right" and the naturalist "left," that success in the political realm is considered to be a sign of social "progress" and/or the means by which various problems, which have the remote cause in Original Sin and their Proximate Causes in our own Actual Sins, are going to be resolved. Those who adhere to Americanism become the prisoners of the naturalistic lies that are at the basis of the American founding, willing to subordinate the truths of the Faith--or willing to subordinate the public expression of those truths of the Faith--to whatever political goals appear to be within reach at a given point in time.
Catholic immigrants of the Nineteenth Century, for example, found the way to upward social and economic mobility in the precinct houses of the Democrat Party, whose leaders threw open their arms to the immigrants in the recognition that the newly arrived Americans and their children would be ready sources of support during campaigns and on election day at a time when the Republican Party, which was, by and large, in the control of Masonic nativists, was overtly were hostile to those immigrants. This why so many Catholics remain adherents of the organized agency of naturalism called the Democrat Party as they demonstrate their "fealty" to the "true secular 'church' outside of which there is no social order or justice" for having been the means by which their ancestors could lay a "claim" to the political heritage of the nation. And this is why those Catholics who are slavish adherents of the other organized agency of naturalism, the Republican Party, continue to hold their noses and to accept increasingly higher doses of the so-called "lesser evil" (see When Lesser is Greater), believing that the advance of evil is going to be retarded by the very system that is rooted in the evils of naturalism, an absurdity that has been embraced by the counterfeit church of conciliarism itself.
The truth of the matter, ladies and gentlemen, is very simple: No Catholic can be "neutral" about the advance of evil under cover of law and in every aspect of popular culture.
Would Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., claim that the civil law should be "neutral" about racial segregation?
Would Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., who supports legislation that would confer "civil union" status on those engaged in unrepentant sins, whether unnatural or natural, against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, claim that the civil law should be "neutral" about the rounding up an execution of those who adhere to various false religions, including those based in the Talmud or the Koran?
If not, then, why must the civil law be "neutral" about the slicing and dicing of little babies in the wombs of mothers? Or is Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., "neutral" about the fact that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ sanctified the womb of every mother when He was conceived as a helpless embryo in His own Blessed Mother's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the Annunciation?
No Catholic can be "neutral" in the midst of the promotion of evil in society.
Pope Leo XIII explained this in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890:
Hallowed, therefore, in the minds of Christians is the very idea of public authority, in which they recognize some likeness and symbol as it were of the Divine Majesty, even when it is exercised by one unworthy. A just and due reverence to the laws abides in them, not from force and threats, but from a consciousness of duty; "for God hath not given us the spirit of fear."
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."
Wherefore, to love both countries, that of earth below and that of heaven above, yet in such mode that the love of our heavenly surpass the love of our earthly home, and that human laws be never set above the divine law, is the essential duty of Christians, and the fountainhead, so to say, from which all other duties spring. The Redeemer of mankind of Himself has said: "For this was I born, and for this came I into the world, that I should give testimony to the truth." In like manner: "I am come to cast fire upon earth, and what will I but that it be kindled?'' In the knowledge of this truth, which constitutes the highest perfection of the mind; in divine charity which, in like manner, completes the will, all Christian life and liberty abide. This noble patrimony of truth and charity entrusted by Jesus Christ to the Church she defends and maintains ever with untiring endeavor and watchfulness.
But with what bitterness and in how many guises war has been waged against the Church it would be ill-timed now to urge. From the fact that it has been vouchsafed to human reason to snatch from nature, through the investigations of science, many of her treasured secrets and to apply them befittingly to the divers requirements of life, men have become possessed with so arrogant a sense of their own powers as already to consider themselves able to banish from social life the authority and empire of God. Led away by this delusion, they make over to human nature the dominion of which they think God has been despoiled; from nature, they maintain, we must seek the principle and rule of all truth; from nature, they aver, alone spring, and to it should be referred, all the duties that religious feeling prompts. Hence, they deny all revelation from on high, and all fealty due to the Christian teaching of morals as well as all obedience to the Church, and they go so far as to deny her power of making laws and exercising every other kind of right, even disallowing the Church any place among the civil institutions of the commonweal. These men aspire unjustly, and with their might strive, to gain control over public affairs and lay hands on the rudder of the State, in order that the legislation may the more easily be adapted to these principles, and the morals of the people influenced in accordance with them. Whence it comes to pass that in many countries Catholicism is either openly assailed or else secretly interfered with, full impunity being granted to the most pernicious doctrines, while the public profession of Christian truth is shackled oftentimes with manifold constraints.
Under such evil circumstances therefore, each one is bound in conscience to watch over himself, taking all means possible to preserve the faith inviolate in the depths of his soul, avoiding all risks, and arming himself on all occasions, especially against the various specious sophisms rife among non-believers. In order to safeguard this virtue of faith in its integrity, We declare it to be very profitable and consistent with the requirements of the time, that each one, according to the measure of his capacity and intelligence, should make a deep study of Christian doctrine, and imbue his mind with as perfect a knowledge as may be of those matters that are interwoven with religion and lie within the range of reason. And as it is necessary that faith should not only abide untarnished in the soul, but should grow with ever painstaking increase, the suppliant and humble entreaty of the apostles ought constantly to be addressed to God: "Increase our faith.''
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. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., might like to convince himself that he does not have to adhere to such an "old" encyclical letter, that there must be the strict "separation of Church and State" that he, who helped to block the confirmation of Judge Robert H. Robert as a member of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in 1987 and voted to confirm pro-aborts David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer while voting against John Roberts and Samuel Alito, has championed throughout his apostate career. Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., has been enabled by all manner of conciliar officials in this regard. Indeed, he had a long private meeting in the 1980s with Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who invited the pro-abortion Catholic to take a walk with him in the Vatican gardens as they discussed world affairs. What does it matter to Biden that Pope Pius XI reminded one and all in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922, that Catholics are bound to accept and abide by the Social Teaching of the Catholic Church as elucidated by Popes Leo XIII, Saint Pius X, and Benedict XV:
Many believe in or claim that they believe in and hold fast to Catholic doctrine on such questions as social authority, the right of owning private property, on the relations between capital and labor, on the rights of the laboring man, on the relations between Church and State, religion and country, on the relations between the different social classes, on international relations, on the rights of the Holy See and the prerogatives of the Roman Pontiff and the Episcopate, on the social rights of Jesus Christ, Who is the Creator, Redeemer, and Lord not only of individuals but of nations. In spite of these protestations, they speak, write, and, what is more, act as if it were not necessary any longer to follow, or that they did not remain still in full force, the teachings and solemn pronouncements which may be found in so many documents of the Holy See, and particularly in those written by Leo XIII, Pius X, and Benedict XV.
There is a species of moral, legal, and social modernism which We condemn, no less decidedly than We condemn theological modernism.
It is necessary ever to keep in mind these teachings and pronouncements which We have made; it is no less necessary to reawaken that spirit of faith, of supernatural love, and of Christian discipline which alone can bring to these principles correct understanding, and can lead to their observance. This is particularly important in the case of youth, and especially those who aspire to the priesthood, so that in the almost universal confusion in which we live they at least, as the Apostle writes, will not be "tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive." (Ephesians iv, 14) (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)
Moreover, the claim that Catholics can be "personally opposed" to a moral evil that they believe can be "permitted" under cover of law and promoted in popular culture was put to rest 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.)
There is no place for the likes of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., or Edward Moore Kennedy, or Mario Matthew Cuomo, or Barbara Mikulski, or George Elmer Pataki, or Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Gray Davis, or Rudolph William Giuliani, or Susan Molinari Paxon, or Susan Collins, or Richard Lazio, or Thomas Ridge, or Richard Durbin, or Thomas Harkin, or Kathleen Sebelius, or Jennifer Granholm, or Geraldine Ferraro, or George Mitchell, or Patrick Kennedy III, or Joseph Patrick Kennedy III, or Jack Reed, or Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, or Andrew Cuomo, or Loretta Sanchez Brixey, or Linda Sanchez, or Nancy Pelosi, or Mike Arcuri, or Carol Mosely Braun, or James Moran, or Charles Rangel, or Marty Meehan, or Patrick Leahy, or Maurice Hinchey, or Thomas Foley, or Jim Doyle--or any of those of like mind who are now dead--to stand. One is either with Our Blesesd Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the absolute and uncompromising defense of the inviolability of all innocent human life or one is with the devil. There is no middle ground. None. And the only way to defend the absolute inviolability of innocent human life is to defend the absolute integrity of the Catholic Faith, which has been under such attack, both overtly and subtlety, by the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Senator Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., will prove himself to be an adept campaigner and a good debater. He is avuncular and will play the role of the partisan "attack dog" very well. He has a quick wit and uses self-effacing humor very effectively (when he's not plagiarizing the work of others, that is). He will win many votes from "blue collar" Catholics who know nothing about how anyone who supports even one abortion under cover of law, no less supports what he calls "neutrality" about chemical or surgical abortions (Biden is opposed to the government funding of surgical abortions), is unqualified to hold any office of public trust, whether elected or appointed.
Although naturalists of the false opposites of the "right" and the "left" disagree on many points, they agree on the basic naturalistic presuppositions of the American founding, thereby rejecting out of hand as "insanity" any suggestion that the civil state has an obligation to foster those conditions in civil society conductive to the sanctification and salvation of the souls of its citizens as members of the Catholic Church. The fully pro-abortion Catholic Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and the Baptist partly pro-abortion John Sidney McCain III would agree that anyone who took the following passage of Pope Saint Pius X's Vehementer Nos, February 11 1906, is out of his mind crazy or simply possessed of an "unrealistic" view of the world:
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.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." 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. -- "Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)
We must defend the integrity of the Catholic Faith as Catholics steeped in the lies of naturalism, whether of the naturalist "left" or the naturalist "right," "duke it out" in the illusion of "competition" that is the farce of American electoral politics. We must pray our Rosaries of reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, making sure to offer up our prayers and sufferings and mortifications to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. We seek to make reparation for our sins, not to be "neutral" about them. We seek to help others to have true contrition for their own sins and to grow in holiness as they flee from the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and have their souls vivified by the Sacraments as they are administered by true bishops and true priests in the Catholic "catacombs" where no concessions are made to conciliarism or to the nonexistent "legitimacy" of its false shepherds.
Lest we forget to think and to speak and to act supernaturally in the midst of the "rush" of the sideshow that is partisan politics, we must continue to beseech Our Lady in this month of her own Immaculate Heart, that the merits won for us by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, on the wood of the Holy Cross will vivify us and fortify us to discharge our responsibilities to be champions of Christ the King and of her, Our Immaculate Queen, as we make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as consecrating ourselves to Him through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.
Our Lady gave us her Most Holy Rosary to fight heresy, not to make compromises with it, not to be silent in its wretched wake. Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary will vanquish the enemies of her Divine Son who dare to claim to represent Him as they offend Him and give scandal His little ones repeatedly. May we also remember to use that same weapon of the Rosary to vanquish the vices lurking in our own souls that are keeping us from being better witnesses to the cause of Christ the King and herself, Our Immaculate Queen.
Vivat Christus Rex!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
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.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Philip Benizi, pray for us.
Saint Bartholomew, pray for us.