|
Complete Creatures of Caesar and His Minions
Part One
by
Thomas A. Droleskey
Men may come and men may go, because God has left plenty of room for the to and fro of their free-will; but the substantial lines of nature and the not less substantial lines of Eternal Law have never changed, are not changing and never will change. There are bounds beyond which one may stray as far as one sees fit, but to do so ends in death; there are limits which empty philosophical fantasizing may have one mock or not take seriously, but they put together an alliance of hard facts and nature to chastise anybody who steps over them. And history has sufficiently taught, with frightening proof from the life and death of nations, that the reply to all violators of the outline of "humanity" is always, sooner or later, catastrophe.
From the dialectic of Hegel onwards, we have had dinned in our ears what are nothing but fables, and by dint of hearing them so often, many people end up by getting used to them, if only passively. But the truth of the matter is that Nature and Truth, and the Law bound up in both, go their imperturbable way, and they cut to pieces the simpletons who upon no grounds whatsoever believe in radical and far-reaching changes in the very structure of man.
The consequences of such violations are not a new outline of man, but disorders, hurtful instability of all kinds, the frightening dryness of human souls, the shattering increase in the number of human castaways, driven long since out of people's sight and mind to live out their decline in boredom, sadness and rejection. Aligned on the wrecking of the eternal norms are to be found the broken families, lives cut short before their time, hearths and homes gone cold, old people cast to one side, youngsters willfully degenerate and -- at the end of the line -- souls in despair and taking their own lives. All of which human wreckage gives witness to the fact that the "line of God" does not give way, nor does it admit of any adaption to the delirious dreams of the so-called philosophers! (Giuseppe Cardinal Siri,
Men's Dress Worn By Women.)
Although the late Giuseppe Cardinal Siri, Archbishop of Genoa, Italy, from May 29, 1946, to July 6, 1987, wrote the words quoted above in an "notification" to his clergy about the harm of women wearing masculine attire, his words have application to the simple truth that false ideas always produce bad consequences. While God does indeed intends to bring good out of the evil done by men, He never positively wills us to commit any evil or positively wills us to believe in false ideas that can lead only to evil consequences. To believe in a falsehood, even if one is sincere in such a belief, is to permit oneself to be led in a thousand different and frequently contradictory directions.
Yes, I have used this quotation from Cardinal Siri's remarks and the paragraph just below it several times on this site. I will never tire of doing so as we live in a land where enemies of Catholic truth have always been in charge of the means of what is called "public education" and of mass communications and entertainment. These enemies of Catholic truth have been inspired, whether or not they realize it, to devise a whole language of perdition so that words can be turned into phrases that will sink so deep into the psyche of unsuspecting people, including, of course, Catholics, that even those who oppose recognize and oppose the evil represented by those phrases will adopt them in an effort to blunt their impact, to say nothing who fall for the slogans that are meant to take the place of rational thought and to substitute the "wisdom" of naturalists for the truths of the Holy Faith.
Sloganeering is nothing new, of course. It is what the forerunners of today's naturalists and conciliar revolutionaries amongst the relativists of ancient Athens in the Fifth Century before the Nativity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:
"It is as though we had returned to the age of Protagoras and the
Sophists, the age when the art of persuasion--whose modern equivalent is
advertising slogans, publicity, propaganda meetings, the press, the
cinema, and radio--took the place of thought and controlled the fate of
cities and accomplished coups d'etat. So the ninth book of Plato's
Republic looks like a description of contemporary events." (Simone Weil,
quoted in Russell Kirk, The Roots of American Order.)
Although a serious study of the misuse of language to advance the aims of various false religions and ideologies and philosophies and fads would take a book length manuscript to complete, a few examples from the history of the last few decades will suffice for before explaining how the brainwashing of American citizens by means of the mass media and America's Concentration Camps has become so advanced that it could be said without any fear of contradiction that the final attack of Judeo-Masonry is centering upon where it began: upon marriage and the family.
"The people" are ready to accept this final attack, however "outrageous" and "out of the mainstream" it might appear to many naturalists of the false opposite of the "right," because there is no longer the superabundant support given even to non-Catholics by means of the Actual Graces that flow out of every true offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to resist that which is opposed to nature and because most Catholics have been taught by the conciliar revolutionaries to be immersed in the world and to be willing minions of the monster state of Modernity.
There is really nothing new in the belief that children belong to the state and not the family. It is only because most people, immersed in the "trees" of this or that controversy, have little historical reference to recognize the "end game" of naturalism" must center on the total annihilation of the family. Most Catholics in the United States of America, having been indoctrinated in the heresy of Americanism from their tenderest days, have no understanding whatsoever how everything in our personal and social lives must center on the Catholic Faith, no less that each nation has an obligation to recognize Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as King.
While the recent comments of Melissa Harris-Perry, a host on the Masonic Society for Naturalist Brainwashing and Communism (MSNBC), have attracted a great deal of criticism, they are really nothing new whatsoever, something that will be noted below at some length:
We have never invested in public education as much as we should have,
because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid
is yours, and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very
collective notion of “These are our children”; so part of it is that we
have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their
parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids
belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility and
not just the household’s, then we start making better investments. (MSNBC Host Says Children Belong to Community, Not Parents.)
Melissa Harris-Perry reinforced her Judeo-Masonic-Communist position after she had received a storm of criticism and played the "victim card" as a result:
My inbox began filling with hateful, personal attacks on Monday, apparently as a result of conservative reactions to a recent “Lean Forward” advertisement now airing on MSNBC, which you can view above. What I thought was an uncontroversial comment on my desire for Americans to see children as everyone’s responsibility has created a bit of a tempest in the right’s teapot. Allow me to double down.
One thing is for sure: I have no intention of apologizing for saying that our children, all of our children, are part of more than our households, they are part of our communities and deserve to have the care, attention, resources, respect and opportunities of those communities.
When the flood of vitriolic responses to the ad began, my first reaction was relief. I had spent the entire day grading papers and was relieved that since these children were not my responsibility, I could simply mail the students’ papers to their moms and dads to grade! But of course, that is a ridiculous notion. As a teacher, I have unique responsibilities to the students in my classroom at Tulane University, and I embrace those responsibilities. It is why I love my job.
Then I started asking myself where did I learn this lesson about our collective responsibility to children. So many answers quickly became evident.
I learned it from my mother who, long after her own kids were teens, volunteered on the non profit boards of day care centers that served under-resourced children.
I learned it from my father who, despite a demanding career and a large family of his own, always coached boys’ basketball teams in our town.
I learned it from my third-grade public school teacher, who gave me creative extra work and opened up her classroom to me after school so that I wouldn’t get bored and get in trouble.
I learned it from the men who volunteered as crossing guards in my neighborhood even if they don’t have kids in the schools.
I learned it from the conservative, Republican moms at my daughter’s elementary school, who gave her a ride home every day while I was recovering from surgery.
I learned it watching the parents of Newtown and Chicago as they call for gun control legislation to protect all the children of our communities.
I learn it from my elderly neighbors who never complain about paying property taxes that support our schools, even if they have no children in the schools today.
And I have learned it from other, more surprising sources as well. I find very little common ground with former President George W. Bush, but I certainly agree that no child should be left behind. And while I disagree with the policies he implemented under that banner, I wholeheartedly support his belief that we have a collective national interest in all children doing well.
I’ll even admit that despite being an unwavering advocate for women’s reproductive rights, I have learned this lesson from some of my most sincere, ethically motivated, pro-life colleagues. Those people who truly believe that the potential life inherent in a fetus is equivalent to the actualized life of an infant have argued that the community has a distinct interest in children no matter what the mother’s and father’s interests or needs. So while we come down on different sides of the choice issue, we agree that kids are not the property of their parents. Their lives matter to all of us.
I believe wholeheartedly, and without apology, that we have a collective responsibility to the children of our communities even if we did not conceive and bear them. Of course, parents can and should raise their children with their own values. But they should be able to do so in a community that provides safe places to play, quality food to eat, terrific schools to attend, and economic opportunities to support them. No individual household can do that alone. We have to build that world together.
So those of you who were alarmed by the ad can relax. I have no designs on taking your children. Please keep your kids! But I understand the fear.
We do live in a nation where slaveholders took the infants from the arms of my foremothers and sold them for their own profit. We do live in a nation where the government snatched American Indian children from their families and “re-educated” them by forbidding them to speak their language and practice their traditions.
But that is not what I was talking about, and you know it.
I venture to say that anyone and everyone should know full well that my message in that ad was a call to see ourselves as connected to a larger whole. I don’t want your kids, but I want them to live in safe neighborhoods. I want them to learn in enriching and dynamic classrooms. I want them to be healthy and well and free from fear. I want them to grow up to agree or disagree with me or with you and to have all the freedom and tools they need to express what they believe.
And no hateful thing that you say to me or about me will ever change that I want those things for your children. (Melissa Harris-Perry defends Communist view of parents and children.)
One of the most childish things in the world that a human being can do is to say that those who criticize him are guilty of "hating" him. Remember, it was about a year ago now that I discovered that Fox 19 News in Cincinnati, Ohio, has posted on its website "news" that consisted of a repeated almost verbatim a press release issued by the Christophobic Southern Poverty Law Center in which I was listed as the leader of a "hate group," something that was explored in Chopped Liver No Moreand Chopped Liver No More Update. Melissa Harris-Perry is being petulant and childish as she makes herself out to be a "victim" because she was criticized for making comments that are clearly Marxist-Leninist in nature.
Not much time needs to be spent in dealing with the substance of Miss Perry's sophistic screed as it is so shallow and just filled with the same collectivist cliches found in Hillary Rodham Clinton's It Takes A Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us. A brief moment, however, needs to be spent on this poor woman's contention that "we have never invested in public education as we should have."
This is pure idiocy.
Pure and simple idiocy.
Trillions of Federal and state taxpayer dollars have been spent on the brainwashing centers controlled called "public schools" dating back to the time of then President Lyndon Baines Johnson's "Great Society" programs in 1965.
What has been the result of this massive expenditure on "teaching training" in all manner of "methodology" classes that are founded in the mumbo-jumbo of one naturalist ideology after another (evolutionism, feminism, psychology, egalitarianism, collectivism, environmentalism, Maxism-Leninism, revisionist history, Christophobia, diversity, tolerance and the systematic brainwashing of children in the acceptance of all manner of moral evils by means of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments)?
What has been the result of this idiocy?
A nation of idiots.
That's right, you read this correctly.
A nation of idiots.
Many high school and college graduates can longer write or read their native language intelligibly.
Most high school and college graduates cannot use the faculty of reason, having been taught to rely upon emotion and "feelings" as the guides to their daily lives.
Most high school and college graduates know nothing of First and Last Things, are ignorant of true history and are convinced that the monster civil state of Modernity exists to enable them at every turn, that they are never responsible for anything that goes wrong in their lives. Miss class? That's somebody else's fault. Didn't study for an examination? Blame that on a "difficult" life. Got out of control in a classroom or broke just civil laws to acquire material things or to engage in the trafficking of substances designed to dull the senses and blur one's perception of reality? All can be excused, if not justified.
That's what our nation of idiots, many of whom speak in double and triple negatives in a single sentence, has been taught as a result of the trillions of dollars spent on the miseducation of the young in the past fifty years.
Melissa Harris-Perry is living proof of this idiocy as she repeats it so freely and with such forceful conviction.
It is important to understand the roots of this attack on the rights of parents that is nothing other than an attack on the Order of Nature (Creation) ordained by God and, of course, on the Order of Redemption (Grace) itself.
Francis the Hun's Pal Named Martin Luther
The proto-revolutionary of Protestantism, Martin Luther, set the world on its present course of self-destruction that is being cemented by modern totalist civil state in many ways, something that was detailed a bit in Francis The Hun two days ago.
One of the chief ways in which Luther is responsible for the destruction of the family and thus of the right ordering of nations by supporting divorce and remarriage in clear defiance of the following words that issued forth from the mouth for the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:
[1] And it came to pass when Jesus had ended these words, he departed from
Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan. [2] And great multitudes followed him: and he healed them there. [3] And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him, and saying: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? [4] Who answering, said to them: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, Made them male and female? And he said: [5] For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.
[6] Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. [7] They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? [8] He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart
permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not
so. [9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he
that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery. [10] His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry. (Matthew 19: 1-10.)
It has been downhill ever since as instability was introduced into family life in the name of a giving a rebirth to the same immorality that plagued ancient Rome in the centuries before its collapse.
Martin Luther's attack on the indissolubility of a valid, ratified and consummated marriage opened the way wide to marital infidelity as never before, something that increased with the development of various devices and pills to prevent the conception of children. This resulted in the feminization of poverty as many women were abandoned by their husbands for "newer models," so to speak, and thus left to fend for the provision of their temporal needs and those of their children all on their own. Many children, deprived of their fathers by unnatural means, were left feeling unloved.
Even though Martin Luther himself opposed contraception, the logic of the revolution that he unleashed upon the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church is such that his rejection of the authority of that Catholic Church left each person to be his own interpreter of Faith and Morals. It was thus pretty logical for the Anglican sect to endorse the use of contraception by married couples in certain circumstances, an endorsement that helped to institutionalized this warfare against the Sovereignty God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage throughout entire nations.
Open secularists such as they nymphomaniac named Margaret Sanger of the Birth Control League systematically recruited Protestant "ministers" to promote contraception, doing so with special purpose among black Protestants so as to destabilize the families of black Americans, make them wards of the civil state and thus the subject of various experiments in social engineering, including that represented by the brainwashing of "public education."
You doubt my word?
Let Margaret Sanger give the testimony herself:
I accepted an invitation to talk to the women's
branch of the Ku Klux Klan...I saw through the door dim figures parading
with banners and illuminated crosses...I was escorted to the platform,
was introduced, and began to speak...In the end, through simple
illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen
invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered." (Margaret
Sanger: An Autobiography, p.366)
On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who
never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization,
referring to immigrants and poor people
On sterilization & racial purification:
Sanger believed that, for the purpose of racial "purification,"
couples should be rewarded who chose sterilization. Birth Control in
America, The Career of Margaret Sanger, by David Kennedy, p. 117,
quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.
On the right of married couples to bear children:
Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she
wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932
On the purpose of birth control:
The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of
thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)
On the rights of the handicapped and mentally ill, and racial minorities:
"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- that is the chief
aim of birth control." Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12
On religious convictions regarding sex outside of marriage:
"This book aims to answer the needs expressed in thousands on thousands of letters to me in the solution of marriage problems... Knowledge of sex truths frankly
and plainly presented cannot possibly injure healthy, normal, young
minds. Concealment, suppression, futile attempts to veil the unveilable -
these work injury, as they seldom succeed and only render those who
indulge in them ridiculous. For myself, I have full confidence in the
cleanliness, the open-mindedness, the promise of the younger
generation." Margaret Sanger, Happiness in Marriage (Bretano's, New
York, 1927)
On the extermination of blacks:
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro
population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more
rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of
Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon
On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
In her "Plan for Peace," Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication
of those she deemed "feebleminded." Among the steps included in her evil
scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization;
segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April
1932, p. 107
On adultery:
A woman's physical satisfaction was more important than any marriage vow, Sanger believed. Birth Control in America, p. 11
On the Catholic Church's view of contraception:
"...enforce SUBJUGATION by TURNING WOMAN INTO A MERE INCUBATOR." The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May 1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.
On motherhood:
"I cannot refrain from saying that women must come to recognize there is
some function of womanhood other than being a child-bearing machine."
What Every Girl Should Know, by Margaret Sanger (Max Maisel, Publisher,
1915) [Jesus said: "Daughters of Jerusalem, weep... for your children.
For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed
(happy) are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the breasts
which never gave suck." (Luke 23:24)]
"The most merciful thing that a large family does
to one of its infant members is to kill it." Margaret Sanger, Women and
the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923) (Margaret Sanger Quotes.)
Who is to blame for Margaret Sanger?
Martin Luther, the pal of Francis the Hun and of his predecessor, Joseph Alois Ratzinger, and, of course of Karol Josef Wojtyla.
Margaret Sanger worked closely
with Rexford Guy Tugwell, a socialist, one of the late President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "brain trust" who served as the director of
Resettlement Administration, a quintessential enterprise of social
engineering in Roosevelt's empire of social and economic
engineering known as the New Deal. Tugwell served also as Roosevelt's
appointee as the territorial governor of Puerto Rico from 1941-1946, a
position he used to encourage the sterilization of Puerto Ricans. Social
engineering, including the Social Security system and Medicaid, which
is a form of rationing health-care, and the late President Lyndon Baines
Johnson's "War on Poverty" and "Great Society" and George Walker Bush's
"no child left behind" program--along with scores of other programs and
policies--have been efforts to "engineer" the better society.
One would think that the failure of these programs,
founded in variants of the naturalism of John Locke's false assertions
that human beings could, by the use of human reason alone unaided by the
light of Divine Revelation or by Sanctifying Grace, devise various
sorts of social structures to "improve" the condition of man without any
change in behavior on the part of men, to work would discredit the
naturalistic approach to life and public policy that has no place for
the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man in
His Most Blessed Mother's Virginal and Immaculate Womb by the power of
the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the
Annunciation, and no place at all for the Deposit of Faith that the
Divine Redeemer has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for Its
eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. No, those who are
steeped in the errors and the lies of naturalism can never admit that
Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order.
They keep on giving us failed domestic programs that bankrupt the
citizenry and foreign wars that only worsen the state of the world.
Behold the results of the "Great Society." An entire nation is "left behind" (thank you very much, George Walker Bush) to listen to the likes of Melissa Harris-Perry "pontificate" from the thrones of the Judeo-Masonic mass media.
State Control of Education as Fundamental to the Attack on the Family
Public schooling has been one of the principal means by which "professionals" have been able to indoctrinate the young in various "state approved" doctrines, being used first and foremost in the Nineteenth Century as the means to assert that the principal educator of children is the civil state, not the parents, and to teach the children of Catholic immigrants to accept Americanism and religious indifferentism as "goods" demanding of acceptance lest one's "patriotism" be questioned.
The People's Republic of Massachusetts (an entity whose legal name is
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) became the first state to mandate
curricular standards on a statewide basis, creating in 1837 the first state
Department of Education (thought control) in the United States of
America, principally to Americanize the children of Irish immigrants to
this country. Horace Mann, who had no initial interest in the subject of
education, was recruited to head the new agency. He warmed to to this
task with ready abandon, establishing the following guideline over the
course of seven years:
1) Fifth Annual Report (1841). Mann
argued successfully that economic wealth would increase through an
educated public. It was therefore in the self interest of business to
pay the taxation for public education.
(2) Seventh Annual Report (1843). Horace
Mann inspected and appraised favorably the Prussian school system. This
report led to widespread improvement .of education through the
educational theories of Pestalozzi, Herbart and eventually Froebel.
(3) Tenth Annual Report (1846). Mann
asserted that education was a natural right for every child. It is a
necessary responsibility of the State to insure that education was
provided for every child. This report led to the adoption of the first
State law requiring compulsory attendance in school in 1852.
(4) Twelfth Annual Report (1848). He
presented a rationale for the support of public education through
taxation. Society improves as a result of an educated p public. He
argued for non-sectarian schools, so the taxpayer would not be in the position of supporting any established
religion with which he might disagree in conscience. (Educational
Contributions of Horace Mann)
The development of Horace
Mann's thought was influenced heavily by the "Prussian Education System"
that had its origins in the Eighteenth Century and whose own
"evolution" over the course of the decades thereafter convinced him to
use it as a model for Massachusetts, which, in turn, could be a model
to "standardize" his brainwashing standards for the rest of the nation.
Indeed, Mann, who belonged to the extinct species of naturalist
organized crime known as the Whig Party, convinced his fellow party
adherents to become "true believers" in the "Prussian Education System."
Mann even traveled to Prussia in 1843 to see the system for himself.
The People's Republic of New York was one of the first to follow the
model that Mann established in the neighbor statist stronghold of
Massachusetts, and it is absolutely no accident at al that these two
states remain two of the most hostile states to home schooling parents
in the United States of America at this time (Maryland, North Dakota,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont round out the ranks of the states
whose regulations are designed to make home schooling very difficult as
parents are monitored at every turn).
One of the keys to the "Prussian Education
System" was the passage of laws to compel the attendance of children in
state-run institutions of thought-control. The Prussians of the
Eighteenth Century, however, were simply implementing the idea of a
former Augustinian monk, a man named Martin Luther, who believed that it
was necessary to require children to go to school in order that they
learn how to read the Protestant version of the Bible to make sure that
all remnants of Catholicism could be eradicated from the German states
influenced by his revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself
instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church and
to organize society under the Social Reign of Christ the King, which,
of course, Luther, much like another German, a priest from Bavaria who
was ordained on June 29, 1951 (Father Joseph Ratzinger), rejected out of
hand.
By the way, the likes of Horace Mann, much like
Luther three hundreds years before him, desired compulsory so that those
children of Catholic immigrants would be exposed to the "truth" in the
blasphemous "King James" version of the Bible. We must remember that
each and every Protestant "bible" is worthless it contains false
translations and omit Sacred Books contained in the Canon of Sacred
Scripture, thereby blaspheming God the Holy Ghost, under whose
inspiration each word contained in Holy Writ was written. Do not permit
yourselves into believing one of naturalism's greatest lies: that it
doesn't matter what version of the Bible one reads. This belief is from
the devil himself.
Compulsory attendance in state-run institutions of
thought-control was essential to American "educational reformers" such
as Horace Mann for many of the same reasons, although the Prussian
system that they admired so much had made explicit what was implicit in
Luther's call for "compulsory education:" the belief that the civil
state has the "right" and thus the "duty" to educate children, not
parents, thereby violating the precepts of the Fourth Commandment and
denying the graces inherent in the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony that
equip every father and mother with the graces necessary to fulfill the
primary end of their wedded union in Christ the King: the procreation
and education of children.
Prussia, the land that gave birth to the Freemason
named Otto von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of Germany, whose
imposition of a mandatory retirement age and of social security under
Chancellor Otto von Bismarck also was designed to destroy the Fourth
Commandment so as to "relieve" grown children from caring for their
elderly parents if the latter could not care for themselves (and thus
creating a dependency class that would look to the state, not to family
members, for support and sustenance), can thus be seen quite rightly as
having been in the vanguard of planting the seeds for the rise of the
National Education Association (whose initials are, of course, "N.E.A.,"
the "Non-Education Association") and of the politicians who have
enabled and empowered their fellow ideologues in the industry of
professional thought-control so as to create a class of willing citizens
who will never question what caesar and his minions tell them to do.
Attacks against the ability of parents to educate
their children as they see fit have been waged by Freemasons throughout
the country in the past two hundred years.
The State of Oregon, a den of Freemasonry which has
championed "physician-assisted suicide" in recent years as a result of a
voter initiative enacted into law by means of a popular referendum,
became quite a laboratory to see how far the warfare against the Church
could be taken. A voter initiative, sponsored by the Ku Klux Klan and
the Oregon Scottish Rite Masons, was approved on November 7, 1922, to
force all parents to send their children to public schools. A legal
battle ensued, prompting the Supreme Court of the United States on June
1, 1925, to issue a decision in the case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters that invalidated the Oregon law, which would have become effective in 1926 had the Court not ruled against the law.
Writing for the Court, Associate Justice James C.
McReynolds, an appointee of President Woodrow Wilson who served on the
Court between 1914 and 1941, noted:
The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this
Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its
children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers
only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture
him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty,
to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. (Associate
Justice James C. McReynolds, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, June 1, 1925, )
Although Justice McReynolds said that parents could not be forced to send their children to public schools, he did hold that the states had the right to compel attendance in some school
and to establish educational standards, thereby providing the Supreme Court of the United States' imprimatur on the usurpation of the rights of
parents and of the Church that had begun with Horace Mann eighty-eight
years before. Consider the language of Justice McReynolds in this
regard:
No question is raised concerning the power of the state reasonably to
regulate all schools, to inspect, supervise and examine them, their
teachers and pupils; to require that all children of proper age attend
some school, that teachers shall be of good moral character and
patriotic disposition, that certain studies plainly essential good
citizenship must be taught, and that nothing be taught which is
manifestly inimical to the public welfare. (
This is quite a loaded passage.
What constitutes "good citizenship? Acceptance of American "values,"
including Calvinistic capitalism and religious indifferentism? Being
taught "the history and contributions" of those engaged in sins that cry
out to Heaven for vengeance? What is "manifestly inimical to the public
welfare" if not this? Justice McReynolds, was, however, simply
reaffirming what had become by his name an accepted article of the
American "faith," that public schooling was the backbone of a "free"
people.
Obviously, the very belief that we are a "free" people is itself a gigantic myth. We are not.
We are the slaves of the state and its arbitrary whims.
We are slaves of a Constitution that is indifferent
to the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man
in Our Lady's Virginal and Immaculate womb and hostile to the Deposit of
Faith the God-Man has entrusted solely to His true Church for Its
eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.
We are the slaves of career politicians who believe
that we exist in order to enable them to pick our pockets to enlarge the
powers of the state and thus increase their ability to control every
aspect of the legitimate exercise of our human free wills.
We are the slaves of the corporate robber barons who
contribute mightily to the coffers of these career politicians while
they manufacture products to appeal to our greed and our desire to
luxury, entrapping us into various snares of endless materialism and
hedonism.
We are the slaves of the powerful Judeo-Masonic
machinery that controls our banking and our entertainment and our courts
and our "educational" system.
We are the slaves of stupid myths about this country
being the "guarantor of human liberty worldwide" when the truth is that
anyone who points out the absurdity of these myths is denounced
fascistically as unpatriotic.
We are the slaves of pharmaceutical companies who
produce poisons to addict us to their "cures" for diseases that have
been produced by lives of excess and by the very chemical additives
placed in our food and our water to make us sick so as to make us
dependent upon these poisons.
We are not a "free" people. We are slaves.
Our True Pope Warned Us and Yet We Refuse to Listen
Our true popes have warned us that the attacks on the family are of the essence of Protestantism and the Judeo-Masonry that helped to spawn Marxism-Leninism in its wake.
Perhaps
it would be useful once again to review how the lodge brothers and
their fellow travelers in the world of the organized forces of
naturalism sought to corrupt the young by seizing control of the
education of their minds away from their parents and Holy Mother Church
and by disseminating their filth in what passes for "popular culture."
Pope Leo XIII noted the Masonic roots of public schooling in his
encyclical letter on Freemasonry, Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884:
Wherefore we see that men are publicly tempted by
the many allurements of pleasure; that there are journals and pamphlets
with neither moderation nor shame; that stage-plays are remarkable for
license; that designs for works of art are shamelessly sought in the
laws of a so-called verism; that the contrivances of a soft and delicate
life are most carefully devised; and that all the blandishments of
pleasure are diligently sought out by which virtue may be lulled to
sleep. Wickedly, also, but at the same time quite consistently, do those
act who do away with the expectation of the joys of heaven, and bring
down all happiness to the level of mortality, and, as it were, sink it
in the earth. Of what We have said the following fact, astonishing not
so much in itself as in its open expression, may serve as a
confirmation. For, since generally no one is accustomed to obey crafty
and clever men so submissively as those whose soul is weakened and
broken down by the domination of the passions, there have been in the
sect of the Freemasons some who have plainly determined and proposed
that, artfully and of set purpose, the multitude should be satiated with
a boundless license of vice, as, when this had been done, it would
easily come under their power and authority for any acts of daring. . . .
With
the greatest unanimity the sect of the Freemasons also endeavors to
take to itself the education of youth. They think that they can easily
mold to their opinions that soft and pliant age, and bend it whither
they will; and that nothing can be more fitted than this to enable them
to bring up the youth of the State after their own plan. Therefore, in
the education and instruction of children they allow no share, either of
teaching or of discipline, to the ministers of the Church; and in many
places they have procured that the education of youth shall be
exclusively in the hands of laymen, and that nothing which treats of the
most important and most holy duties of men to God shall be introduced
into the instructions on morals. (Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884)
Pope Pius XI, writing in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929, explained the failure of naturalists to understand the true purposes of education:
This perfection they seek to acquire by means of education. But many of
them with, it would seem, too great insistence on the etymological
meaning of the word, pretend to draw education out of human nature
itself and evolve it by its own unaided powers. Such easily fall into
error, because, instead of fixing their gaze on God, first principle and
last end of the whole universe, they fall back upon themselves,
becoming attached exclusively to passing things of earth; and thus their
restlessness will never cease till they direct their attention and
their efforts to God, the goal of all perfection, according to the
profound saying of Saint Augustine: "Thou didst create us, O Lord, for
Thyself, and our heart is restless till it rest in Thee." (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
True education, wrote Pope Pius XI, must revolve around Our Lord as He has revealed Himself through His true Church:
It is therefore as important to make no mistake in education, as it is
to make no mistake in the pursuit of the last end, with which the whole
work of education is intimately and necessarily connected. In fact,
since education consists essentially in preparing man for what he must
be and for what he must do here below, in order to attain the sublime
end for which he was created, it is clear that there can be no true
education which is not wholly directed to man's last end, and that in
the present order of Providence, since God has revealed Himself to us in
the Person of His Only Begotten Son, who alone is "the way, the truth
and the life," there can be no ideally perfect education which is not
Christian education. ( (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
(As a note of reference, it
is important to bear in mind that the Popes of the Catholic Church, as
opposed to the "pontiffs" of the counterfeit church of conciliarism,
used the word "Christian" to refer to the Catholic Faith. The reason for
this is simple: although Protestants say that they are Christians, they
do not truly know Our Lord since they reject His true Church and
dissent from multiple articles He has revealed and deposited in His true
Church. They do not represent Christianity at all. Only the Catholic
Church represents Christianity. She alone has the right to use the
appellation of "Christian.")
Pope Pius XI, the great exponent of the Social Reign of Christ the King, noted in Divini Illius Magistri that the fate of nations depended upon the education of youth in the truths of the Catholic Faith:
From
this we see the supreme importance of Christian education, not merely
for each individual, but for families and for the whole of human
society, whose perfection comes from the perfection of the elements that
compose it. From these same principles, the excellence, we may well
call it the unsurpassed excellence, of the work of Christian education
becomes manifest and clear; for after all it aims at securing the
Supreme Good, that is, God, for the souls of those who are being
educated, and the maximum of well-being possible here below for human
society. And this it does as efficaciously as man is capable of doing
it, namely by cooperating with God in the perfecting of individuals and
of society, in as much as education makes upon the soul the first, the
most powerful and lasting impression for life according to the
well-known saying of the Wise Man, "A young man according to his way,
even when he is old, he will not depart from it." With good reason
therefore did St. John Chrysostom say, "What greater work is there than
training the mind and forming the habits of the young?" (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Man must always keep his
mind his First Cause and Last End in all of his activities, whether he
is acting individually or collectively with others in the pursuit of the
common good of his nation. The state of a nation depends upon the state
of souls, and the state of souls depends upon the extent to which
individual citizens keep themselves in states of Sanctifying Grace and
adhere completely to the Deposit of Faith, including the Church's
immutable Social Doctrine on the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ, which
does not worship at the altar of the false, mythological god of American
"civil liberty."
The Church, therefore, must be free to pursue the
entirety of the mission, including that of education, entrusted to her
by her Divine Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
without any interference from the state. Parents, who form the domestic
cell of the Church in their families, must be free to do so in the bosom
of their homes.
Pope Pius XI noted this in Divini Illius Magistri:
Hence it
is that in this proper object of her mission, that is, "in faith and
morals, God Himself has made the Church sharer in the divine magisterium
and, by a special privilege, granted her immunity from error; hence she
is the mistress of men, supreme and absolutely sure, and she has
inherent in herself an inviolable right to freedom in teaching.' By
necessary consequence the Church is independent of any sort of earthly
power as well in the origin as in the exercise of her mission as
educator, not merely in regard to her proper end and object, but also in
regard to the means necessary and suitable to attain that end. Hence
with regard to every other kind of human learning and instruction, which
is the common patrimony of individuals and society, the Church has an
independent right to make use of it, and above all to decide what may
help or harm Christian education. And this must be so, because the
Church as a perfect society has an independent right to the means
conducive to its end, and because every form of instruction, no less
than every human action, has a necessary connection with man's last end,
and therefore cannot be withdrawn from the dictates of the divine law,
of which the Church is guardian, interpreter and infallible mistress.
This truth is clearly set forth by Pius X of saintly memory:
"Whatever a Christian does even in the order of things of earth, he may
not overlook the supernatural; indeed he must, according to the teaching
of Christian wisdom, direct all things towards the supreme good as to
his last end; all his actions, besides, in so far as good or evil in the
order of morality, that is, in keeping or not with natural and divine
law, fall under the judgment and jurisdiction of the Church." (As
quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Only
a fool would contend that Pope Saint Pius X was wrong, that there is
ever a moment when something we do in the "order of the things of the
earth" can overlook the supernatural. Those "conservatives" who believe
that they can devise plans to combat liberalism and statism and
socialism of likes promoted by President Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and apologists of his such as Melissa Perry-Haris without seeking to restore the Social Reign of Christ the King
are indeed fools, plain and simple. They tilt at windmills as they
refuse, for whatever reason, usually involving a dogmatic adherence to a
political philosophy that they contend pridefully contains the ability
to "resolve" social problems, to state this simple truth: all things
must be restored in Christ the King, both individually and collectively.
After delineating the rights of the Church and the
family with respect to education--and discussing instances when a state
ordered according to Catholic teaching might have to intervene to
protect a child whose religious instruction was being ignored by his
parents, Pope Pius XI wrote in Divini Illius Magistri about the
simple fact that the welfare of the state itself depends entirely upon
its submission to the truths of the Catholic Faith:
Whoever
refuses to admit these principles, and hence to apply them to education,
must necessarily deny that Christ has founded His Church for the
eternal salvation of mankind, and maintain instead that civil society
and the State are not subject to God and to His law, natural and divine.
Such a doctrine is manifestly impious, contrary to right reason, and,
especially in this matter of education, extremely harmful to the proper
training of youth, and disastrous as well for civil society as for the
well-being of all mankind. On the other hand from the application of
these principles, there inevitably result immense advantages for the
right formation of citizens. This is abundantly proved by the history of
every age. Tertullian in his Apologeticus could throw down a challenge
to the enemies of the Church in the early days of Christianity, just as
St. Augustine did in his; and we today can repeat with him:
"Let those who declare the teaching of Christ to be opposed to
the welfare of the State, furnish us with an army of soldiers such as
Christ says soldiers ought to be; let them give us subjects, husbands,
wives, parents, children, masters, servants, kings, judges, taxpayers
and tax gatherers who live up to the teachings of Christ; and then let
them dare assert that Christian doctrine is harmful to the State. Rather
let them not hesitate one moment to acclaim that doctrine, rightly
observed, the greatest safeguard of the State."
While treating of education, it is not out of place to show here
how an ecclesiastical writer, who flourished in more recent times,
during the Renaissance, the holy and learned Cardinal Silvio Antoniano,
to whom the cause of Christian education is greatly indebted, has set
forth most clearly this well established point of Catholic doctrine. He
had been a disciple of that wonderful educator of youth, St. Philip
Neri; he was teacher and Latin secretary to St. Charles Borromeo, and it
was at the latter's suggestion and under his inspiration that he wrote
his splendid treatise on The Christian Education of Youth. In it he
argues as follows:
"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."((Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.
How can produce temporal peace and tranquility as
sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance are protected by law, promoted
in the culture and taught to school children.
The best citizens are well-informed and
well-formed Catholics who are trying to save their immortal souls as
Catholics in cooperation with the graces won for them by the shedding of
Our Lord's Most Precious Blood and which flow forth from the loving
hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces, who has the absolute
right to be honored as the Queen of all nations. It is that simple.
Catholic truth reflects the simplicity of God Himself.
Penetratingly, Pope Pius
XI eviscerated the theories that underlain the work of Horace Mann in
the Nineteenth Century and were being promoted in his own day by the
likes of the pragmatist John Dewey:
Hence every form of
pedagogic naturalism which in any way excludes or weakens supernatural
Christian formation in the teaching of youth, is false. Every method of
education founded, wholly or in part, on the denial or forgetfulness of
original sin and of grace, and relying on the sole powers of human
nature, is unsound. Such, generally speaking, are those modern systems
bearing various names which appeal to a pretended self-government and
unrestrained freedom on the part of the child, and which diminish or
even suppress the teacher's authority and action, attributing to the
child an exclusive primacy of initiative, and an activity independent of
any higher law, natural or divine, in the work of his education.
If any of these terms are used, less properly, to denote the
necessity of a gradually more active cooperation on the part of the
pupil in his own education; if the intention is to banish from education
despotism and violence, which, by the way, just punishment is not, this
would be correct, but in no way new. It would mean only what has been
taught and reduced to practice by the Church in traditional Christian
education, in imitation of the method employed by God Himself towards
His creatures, of whom He demands active cooperation according to the
nature of each; for His Wisdom "reacheth from end to end mightily and
ordereth all things sweetly."
But alas! it is clear from the obvious meaning of the words and
from experience, that what is intended by not a few, is the withdrawal
of education from every sort of dependence on the divine law. So today
we see, strange sight indeed, educators and philosophers who spend their
lives in searching for a universal moral code of education, as if there
existed no decalogue, no gospel law, no law even of nature stamped by
God on the heart of man, promulgated by right reason, and codified in
positive revelation by God Himself in the ten commandments. These
innovators are wont to refer contemptuously to Christian education as
"heteronomous," "passive","obsolete," because founded upon the authority
of God and His holy law.
Such men are miserably deluded in their claim to
emancipate, as they say, the child, while in reality they are making him
the slave of his own blind pride and of his disorderly affections,
which, as a logical consequence of this false system, come to be
justified as legitimate demands of a so-called autonomous nature. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Ah, what did I say about slavery a while back?
Anyone who does not place himself under the sweet yoke of the Divine
Redeemer through the Catholic Church is a slave to many people and
things, including his own blind pride. Any country which does not place
itself under the sweet yoke of the Divine Redeemer's Social Kingship is a
slave to the devil and becomes an oppressor of its people. Who desires
"pedagogic naturalism?" Who desires "the withdrawal of education from
every sort of dependence on the divine law?" Not Our Lord, ladies and
gentlemen. It is the adversary himself who desires these things. It is
he who has been in control of American popular culture from its very
inception. The devil reigns as king if Our Lord does not do so through
His true Church. It is that simple. Anyone care to dissent from this
plain truth?
Pope Pius XI completely
and utterly rejected the whole notion of public schooling, allowing for
rare exceptions in certain cases given the actual realities facing
Catholics in places like the United States of America. As a matter of
principle, however, Pope Pius XI minced no words: public schooling is a
menace to souls and harmful to nations because it does not proceed from
man's First Cause nor lead man back to his Last End:
From
this it follows that the so-called "neutral" or "lay" school, from which
religion is excluded, is contrary to the fundamental principles of
education. Such a school moreover cannot exist in practice; it is bound
to become irreligious. There is no need to repeat what Our Predecessors
have declared on this point, especially Pius IX and Leo XIII, at times
when laicism was beginning in a special manner to infest the public
school. We renew and confirm their declarations, as well as the Sacred
Canons in which the frequenting of non-Catholic schools, whether neutral
or mixed, those namely which are open to Catholics and non-Catholics
alike, is forbidden for Catholic children, and can be at most tolerated,
on the approval of the Ordinary alone, under determined circumstances
of place and time, and with special precautions. Neither can Catholics
admit that other type of mixed school, (least of all the so-called
"école unique," obligatory on all), in which the students are provided
with separate religious instruction, but receive other lessons in common
with non-Catholic pupils from non-Catholic teachers.
For the mere fact that a school gives some religious instruction
(often extremely stinted), does not bring it into accord with the rights
of the Church and of the Christian family, or make it a fit place for
Catholic students. To be this, it is necessary that all the teaching and
the whole organization of the school, and its teachers, syllabus and
text-books in every branch, be regulated by the Christian spirit, under
the direction and maternal supervision of the Church; so that Religion
may be in very truth the foundation and crown of the youth's entire
training; and this in every grade of school, not only the elementary,
but the intermediate and the higher institutions of learning as well. To
use the words of Leo XIII:
"It
is necessary not only that religious instruction be given to the young
at certain fixed times, but also that every other subject taught, be
permeated with Christian piety. If this is wanting, if this sacred
atmosphere does not pervade and warm the hearts of masters and scholars
alike, little good can be expected from any kind of learning, and
considerable harm will often be the consequence." (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Do I mean to condemn Catholics who teach or serve
as administrators in public schools? No. Do I mean to expose my readers
to papal condemnations of these schools as illegitimate and thus harmful
to the souls of their students and to the good of their nations? Yes.
Moreover, I mean to remind my readers once again
that there is no secular, naturalistic, non-denominational or
religiously indifferentist way to "resolve" problems associated with
public schooling. Just as the abuses witnessed by so many Catholics in
the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service are the result of the Novus Ordo's
s warfare against the Catholic Faith, so is it the case that the
problems in public schooling, much like the problems with "judicial
activism," are the result of the Protestant Revolt and of Judeo-Masonry.
There is no expedient solution to problems that have been created by
diabolically-inspired attacks against Our Lord and His Holy Church.
Those of us who are parents, no matter how old (in
my case) or young we may be, have the obligation to avoid all contact
with public schooling entirely. We have the obligation also to avoid all
contact with schools run by the institutions of the counterfeit church
of conciliarism (diocesan or religious) given the influence of Modernism
and the concomitant conciliarist ethos spawned in its sorry wake.
Similarly, we have the obligation to avoid contact with even a seemingly
traditional school that makes any concession to the popular culture
and/or does not demand a complete refusal on the part of parents and
students to participate in any way with a culture that is from the devil
and leads souls to Hell for all eternity. This is not Jansenism. This
is Catholicism. The saints did not indulge the allurements of the world.
They fled from them for love of God and for the love of souls for whom
He offered His very life on the wood of the Holy Cross. No "traditional"
school that does not inculcate in its students a manifest sense of
resistance to the culture and which does not instill in its students an
abiding commitment to restore the Social Reign of Christ the King is a
fit place to send one's children.
Similarly, schools that purport to be traditional
but which do not have teachers qualified to teach the subjects assigned
(or who do not have the ability to teach in general) to them and/or who
are not called upon by their superiors to challenge their students to
pursue the heights of the rigors of academic excellence as befits
redeemed creatures are unworthy of the souls of our children. Mediocrity
is not of the Catholic Faith. Anyone who is content with educational
mediocrity is content with the Capital Sin of Sloth.
Yet is is that the trillions of dollars that have been spent on what passes for "education" in the past fifty years have resulted in a nation of slothful ignoramuses who are moved by materialism, sentimentality and simple base instincts to conduct their daily lives.
Melissa Harris-Perry is just one of hundreds of millions of people in the United States of America and around the world who are ignorant of the following truths enunciated so clearly by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri:
The
proper and immediate end of Christian education is to cooperate with
divine grace in forming the true and perfect Christian, that is, to form
Christ Himself in those regenerated by Baptism, according to the
emphatic expression of the Apostle: "My little children, of whom I am in
labor again, until Christ be formed in you."For the true Christian must
live a supernatural life in Christ: "Christ who is your life," and
display it in all his actions: "That the life also of Jesus may be made
manifest in our mortal flesh."
For precisely this reason, Christian education takes in the whole
aggregate of human life, physical and spiritual, intellectual and moral,
individual, domestic and social, not with a view of reducing it in any
way, but in order to elevate, regulate and perfect it, in accordance
with the example and teaching of Christ.
Hence the true Christian, product of Christian education, is the
supernatural man who thinks, judges and acts constantly and consistently
in accordance with right reason illumined by the supernatural light of
the example and teaching of Christ; in other words, to use the current
term, the true and finished man of character. For, it is not every kind
of consistency and firmness of conduct based on subjective principles
that makes true character, but only constancy in following the eternal
principles of justice, as is admitted even by the pagan poet when he
praises as one and the same "the man who is just and firm of purpose."
And on the other hand, there cannot be full justice except in giving to
God what is due to God, as the true Christian does. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
No, Melissa Harris-Perry, children do not belong to the "community." They belong to God, Who has ordained that their parents are their principal educators, not the civil state:
On this point the common sense of mankind is in such complete accord,
that they would be in open contradiction with it who dared maintain that the
children belong to the State before they belong to the family, and that the
State has an absolute right over their education. Untenable is the reason they
adduce, namely that man is born a citizen and hence belongs primarily to the
State, not bearing in mind that before being a citizen man must exist; and
existence does not come from the State, but from the parents, as Leo XIII wisely
declared: "The children are something of the father, and as it were an extension
of the person of the father; and, to be perfectly accurate, they enter into and
become part of civil society, not directly by themselves, but through the family
in which they were born." "And therefore," says the same Leo XIII, "the
father's power is of such a nature that it cannot be destroyed or absorbed by
the State; for it has the same origin as human life itself." It does not
however follow from this that the parents' right to educate their children is
absolute and despotic; for it is necessarily subordinated to the last end and to
natural and divine law, as Leo XIII declares in another memorable encyclical,
where He thus sums up the rights and duties of parents: "By nature parents have
a right to the training of their children, but with this added duty that the
education and instruction of the child be in accord with the end for which by
God's blessing it was begotten. Therefore it is the duty of parents to make
every effort to prevent any invasion of their rights in this matter, and to make
absolutely sure that the education of their children remain under their own
control in keeping with their Christian duty, and above all to refuse to send
them to those schools in which there is danger of imbibing the deadly poison of
impiety." (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
Melissa Harris-Perry, you are busted. Oh, please spare me any victimology or accuse me of seeking to "impose" my "values" upon you. Truth exists in the nature of things, and it does depend upon human acceptance for its binding force or validity. It is fascists such as you, Melissa Harris-Perry, who seek to impose false beliefs upon everyone in society without exception in the belief that it is the civil state, not the Catholic Church, that is the infallible repository and expositor of all that is true and good.
Pope Pius XI knew full well that the rights of the family were under savage attack in the early Twentieth Century, noting the outcome of the Pierce v. Society of Sisters case that was cited earlier in this commentary:
It must be borne in mind also that the obligation of the family to bring
up children, includes not only religious and moral education, but physical and
civic education as well, principally in so far as it touches upon religion
and morality .
This incontestable right of the family has at various times been
recognized by nations anxious to respect the natural law in their civil
enactments. Thus, to give one recent example, the Supreme Court of the United
States of America, in a decision on an important controversy, declared that it
is not in the competence of the State to fix any uniform standard of education
by forcing children to receive instruction exclusively in public schools, and it
bases its decision on the natural law: the child is not the mere creature of the
State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right coupled with
the high duty, to educate him and prepare him for the fulfillment of his
obligations.
History bears witness how, particularly in modern times, the State has
violated and does violate rights conferred by God on the family. At the same
time it shows magnificently how the Church has ever protected and defended these
rights, a fact proved by the special confidence which parents have in Catholic
schools. As We pointed out recently in Our letter to the Cardinal Secretary of
State:
The family has instinctively understood this to be so, and from the earliest
days of Christianity down to our own times, fathers and mothers, even those of
little or no faith, have been sending or bringing their children in millions to
places of education under the direction of the Church.
It is paternal instinct, given by God, that thus turns with confidence to
the Church, certain of finding in her the protection of family rights, thereby
illustrating that harmony with which God has ordered all things. The Church is
indeed conscious of her divine mission to all mankind, and of the obligation
which all men have to practice the one true religion; and therefore she never
tires of defending her right, and of reminding parents of their duty, to have
all Catholic-born children baptized and brought up as Christians. On the other
hand so jealous is she of the family's inviolable natural right to educate the
children, that she never consents, save under peculiar circumstances and with
special cautions, to baptize the children of infidels, or provide for their
education against the will of the parents, till such time as the children can
choose for themselves and freely embrace the Faith.
We have therefore two facts of supreme importance. As We said in Our
discourse cited above: The Church placing at the disposal of families her office
of mistress and educator, and the families eager to profit by the offer, and
entrusting their children to the Church in hundreds and thousands. These two
facts recall and proclaim a striking truth of the greatest significance in the
moral and social order. They declare that the mission of education regards
before all, above all, primarily the Church and the family, and this by natural
and divine law, and that therefore it cannot be slighted, cannot be evaded,
cannot be supplanted.
From such priority of rights on the part of the Church and of the family
in the field of education, most important advantages, as we have seen, accrue to
the whole of society. Moreover in accordance with the divinely established order
of things, no damage can follow from it to the true and just rights of the State
in regard to the education of its citizens.
These rights have been conferred upon civil society by the Author of
nature Himself, not by title of fatherhood, as in the case of the Church and of
the family, but in virtue of the authority which it possesses to promote the
common temporal welfare, which is precisely the purpose of its existence. Consequently education cannot pertain to civil society in the same way in which
it pertains to the Church and to the family, but in a different way
corresponding to its own particular end and object.
Now this end and object, the common welfare in the temporal order,
consists in that peace and security in which families and individual citizens
have the free exercise of their rights, and at the same time enjoy the greatest
spiritual and temporal prosperity possible in this life, by the mutual union and
co-ordination of the work of all. The function therefore of the civil authority
residing in the State is twofold, to protect and to foster, but by no means to
absorb the family and the individual, or to substitute itself for them. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
The modern civil state in the "free" United States of America is now the mirror image of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as envisioned by Vladimir Lenin and institutionalized with brute force by Joseph Stalin. We are all considered to be complete creatures of caesar and his minions. The entirety of human existence is under attack, starting with the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage and thus the reduction of human beings to merely utilitarian objects who can be disposed of by means of abortion, dehydration and starvation or physical dismemberment while living in the name of the "betterment" of society and to serve the "needs" of "compassion" as killing is performed to maintain the "human dignity," "reproductive rights" and, of course, "to give the gift of life" in the case of human vivisection (see Comparison of Living Body With Those Declared Brain Dead).
Pope Pius XI's description of marriage and the family in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, contained in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937, is an excellent description of the current state of affairs in the so-called "civilized West," including the United States of America, where attacks upon the inviolability of innocent human life and the rights and the very structure of the family are under incessant attack, including, of course, the relentless effort to force us all to accept "gay marriage" as a matter of "civil rights" and in the name of "diversity:"
Refusing to human life any sacred or spiritual
character, such a doctrine logically makes of marriage and the family a
purely artificial and civil institution, the outcome of a specific
economic system. There exists no matrimonial bond of a juridico-moral
nature that is not subject to the whim of the individual or of the
collectivity. Naturally, therefore, the notion of an indissoluble
marriage-tie is scouted. Communism is particularly characterized by the
rejection of any link that binds woman to the family and the home, and
her emancipation is proclaimed as a basic principle. She is
withdrawn from the family and the care of her children, to be thrust
instead into public life and collective production under the same
conditions as man. The care of home and children then devolves upon the
collectivity. Finally, the right of education is denied to parents, for
it is conceived as the exclusive prerogative of the community, in whose
name and by whose mandate alone parents may exercise this right. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)
Forcing women out of the family and into the sweatshops and the
factories was a goal of not only the French and Bolshevik Revolutions,
but also of the Industrial Revolution of Calvinist capitalism. Wives and
mothers whose husbands worked long hours in factories for substandard
wages were forced in many instances to go to work themselves in order to
supplement their husbands' meager incomes. This is what prompted Popes
Leo XIII and Pius XI to insist that the man, the principal breadwinner
of the family, to be paid a "living wage," that is, to be paid enough to
support their families without forcing their wives to abandon the home
and to enter unnecessarily into the work force. The living wage is not a
flat sum of money. Indeed, Holy Mother Church teaches that a just
employer will pay his employees a sum proportionate to the work that
they do and proportionate to the number of children with which he has
been blessed by God. (See the appendix below for Pope Pius XI's explication of this important point in Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931.)
Women, having become accustomed to "equality" in the
Order of Creation (Order of Nature), are now celebrating their ability
to lead and to serve in combat missions with full legal impunity as part
of American military policy, aping not only the revolutionaries in
France in 1789 or those in Russia in 1917 but, of course, the Zionist
revolutionaries of the State of Israel, who have placed women at the
barricades from the beginning of their "war for independence."
Why not?
The errors of Russia, whose origin and metastasis have been explained several times on this site, including in Bearing Bad Tidings. As Our Lady Predicted, are right in plain sight today. Why are so many people so blind to this truth, refusing to accept the fact that failure of our true popes to consecrate Russia to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart have indeed brought about dire consequences for us all. And, if we are honest with ourselves, we know that our own sins, our own lukewarmness, our own indifference to the errors of Modernity and Modernism have helped these errors spread in many ways that we may not even be aware of or care to consider.
In the midst of the evils being promoted by the lords of Modernism in the world and the counterfeit church of conciliarism, we must not permit ourselves to be deceived by these figures of Antichrist.
No, do not be deceived by the news that Senor Bergoglio is going to Fatima on May 13, 2013, to consecrate the beginning of his "Petrine Ministry" to Our Lady of Fatima. This means nothing, something that I explain in my companion article for today, Francis The Deceiver.
We must be calm in the storms that beset us, both ecclesiastically and civilly. The words of Our Lady to Juan Diego on Tepeyac Hill are as relevant now as they were in 1531:
Know for certain that I am the perfect and a perpetual Virgin Mary, Mother of the True God. . . . Here I will show and offer my love, my compassion, my help and my protection to the people. I am your merciful Mother, the Mother of all those who love me, of those who cry to me, of those who have confidence in me. Here I will hear their weeping and their sorrows and will remedy and alleviate their suffering, necessities and misfortunes. . . . Listen and let it penetrate into your heart. . . . Do not be troubled or weighed down with grief. So do not fear any illness or vexation, anxiety or pain. Am I not here who am your Mother? Are you not under my shadow and protection? Am I not your fountain of life? Are you not in the folds of my mantle? In the crossing of my arms? Is there anything else that you need?
As we remain claim as we enfold ourselves in the crossing of Our Lady's arms in the midst of so many snares and traps, we should also remember this injunction of Pope Pius XI, contained in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925:
We firmly hope, however, that the feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.
Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us!
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Hermengild, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints.
|
