Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

by Thomas A. Droleskey

[Editor's note: Work on this article began a week ago today, Monday, March 30, 2009. As there was a need to complete work on Embracing The Faith No Matter the Consequences and as we were faced with one calamity after another last week, I could not resume work on this article until yesterday, Palm Sunday, April 5, 2009 which is in most years the feast of the great Saint Vincent Ferrer.

[It was after work had begun on this article that a reader of this site sent me a promotional announcement for a lecture by Mr. John Vennari, the editor of Catholic Family News, entitled,"Welcome to the USSA." As I did not want to impinge on Mr. Vennari's proprietary rights to this title (well, mine did have periods while his did not), I wrote to him to ask if he would have any objection to my using the same title. Mr. Vennari, who is great disciple of the Social Reign of Christ the King, was most kind to write to say that he had no such objection, and I thank him for his kindness.]

Welcome to the Union of Soviet Socialist America.

The transformation of the United States of America into the Union of Soviet Socialist America did not occur overnight. Not at all. The transformation began on July 4, 1776, when naturalists founded a nation (with the support of perhaps only a third of the residents of the thirteen English colonies that were located up and down the Atlantic seaboard) upon false, naturalistic, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian principles. That is, a nation that does not subordinate a pursuit of the common temporal good in light of man's Last End, keeping in mind the necessity of never violating the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as they have been entrusted by the God-Man Himself, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, must degenerate over the course of time into a totalitarian state.

It is only the Catholic Church that can provide to men the conditions necessary for the right of use of their free wills. It is only the Catholic Church that can prevent the rise of the totalitarian state from the ashes of failed naturalist enterprises to preserve "liberty" and to provide for "limited" self-government replete with a separation of powers with the branches of a national government a proper division of powers between that national government and state or provincial governments. It is precisely because the Catholic Church is the ultimate check against totalitarianism that she has to attacked violently by those ideologues intent on imposing totalitarianism all at once in those countries where she once exercised, although never perfectly or consistently, the Social Reign of Christ the King.

In the former United States of America, however, the Faith was attacked insidiously by the prevailing ethos of naturalism and religious indifferentism wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry and a whole host of multifaceted, inter-related naturalistic ideologies and "philosophies" that, though they may differ with each other on various specifics of thought and praxis, are absolutely as one in contending that it is not necessary for the civil state to recognize the Faith, that it is possible for men, both individually and collectively in the institutions of civil governance, to organize themselves without reference to the Deposit of Faith and that it is possible for men to be be virtuous without belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace. Men who believe in these lies will be imprisoned by the "state" sooner or later. (See: Socialism, Straight From Your "Pro-Life" Conservative, From Luther to Bush to Obama, A Country Full of Boiled Frogs, Dialectical Americanism, Making Us Our Own Jailers, Power Grab.)

Although many commentators steeped in some sort of "conservative" or "libertarian" or "constitutionalist" bent of naturalism focus on the minutiae of the particular ways in which the civil state has grown in the United States of America in the past one hundred years, none of these commentators is willing to examine the flawed premises of the modern civil state. It is, of course, impossible for there to be a truly well-ordered nation if men, whether acting individually or collectively, defy the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law and if they believe that they can be "good" by means of their own unaided powers. Men need the Catholic Faith in their own personal lives. Men need the Catholic Faith in the social lives of their nations.

Pope Saint Pius X, writing in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910, put the matter this way, reminding us that the common temporal good is not founded on a respect for errors and that men need the Catholic Faith to reform their own souls as an absolute and fundamental precondition for the reformation of their societies:

The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.

Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness.

By separating fraternity from Christian charity thus understood, Democracy, far from being a progress, would mean a disastrous step backwards for civilization. If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic charity alone can lead the people in the march of progress towards the ideal civilization.

Finally, at the root of all their fallacies on social questions, lie the false hopes of Sillonists on human dignity. According to them, Man will be a man truly worthy of the name only when he has acquired a strong, enlightened, and independent consciousness, able to do without a master, obeying only himself, and able to assume the most demanding responsibilities without faltering. Such are the big words by which human pride is exalted, like a dream carrying Man away without light, without guidance, and without help into the realm of illusion in which he will be destroyed by his errors and passions whilst awaiting the glorious day of his full consciousness. And that great day, when will it come? Unless human nature can be changed, which is not within the power of the Sillonists, will that day ever come? Did the Saints who brought human dignity to its highest point, possess that kind of dignity? And what of the lowly of this earth who are unable to raise so high but are content to plow their furrow modestly at the level where Providence placed them? They who are diligently discharging their duties with Christian humility, obedience, and patience, are they not also worthy of being called men? Will not Our Lord take them one day out of their obscurity and place them in heaven amongst the princes of His people?. . . .

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact.

 

Men who reject this simple reiteration of Catholic truth will find that all of the electoral schemes and grand strategies and petition drives and other devices that come straight from the devil's revolution against the Social Reign of Christ the King by way of the Protestant Revolt and Judeo-Masonry and Modernism will come to nothing. The civil state must degenerate over the course of time if those who hold the reins of power within it do not pursue the common temporal good in light of man's Last End. The civil state must come to dominate every aspect of human existence if the true Faith does not do so.

As has been noted many times on this site, the power grab that the Wizard of Obama and his allies in the "leftist" bent of naturalism is simply the logical, inexorable result of a political, social, economic and cultural order founded on a variety of false and inter-related naturalistic premises.

One true religion. Censorship.One World Government. Breakdown of family. Worship of man and the earth. Denial of Special Creation. Evolutionism. Cooperation of conciliarists in the naturalism.

Pope Gregory XVI explained in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832, would happen if men persisted in the madness of licentiousness represented by the falsehoods of "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press:"

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.

 

There is no turning back this "pestilence more deadly to the state than any other" by any sort of naturalistic means. The statists who are taking full advantage of the chaos created by the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry believe most firmly in their "secular religion" and they believe that anyone who dissents from their "dogmatic beliefs" and their "ex cathedra" pronouncements is, if you will, a "heretic," although their propagandists usually thrown around terms such as "bigoted," "mentally ill," "reactionary," "judgmental" and "divisive," among other slogans, to denounce those who oppose the gradual imposition of totalitarianism (political, legal, social, cultural, economic, corporate) with the support of large numbers of people at the ballot box.

Political ecumenists would have us believe that the evils of statism can be retarded by "joint action" with Protestants and Orthodox Jews and Mohammedans and even atheists who are outraged by the ways in which governments at the state, local and national levels have increased their intervention in the private sector and have attempted to curb legitimate liberties as a very sophisticated--and frequently hard for the average person to detect--system of thought control is imposed with great precision and exactitude. However, it is precisely the religious indifferentism that has advanced by leaps and bounds a result of the Protestant Revolution and the rise of Judeo-Masonry that has created the conditions that made the triumph of the monster state, where atheism is the lowest common denominator, inevitable.

Pope Leo XIII, writing in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, explained that state indifference to the true religion results in the triumph of practical atheism as the lowest common denominator. He explained fifteen years to the day later, in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, that secularism results in the corruption of law and makes the pursuit of the common temporal good undertaken in light of man's Last End impossible to realize:

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

We are indeed now very far removed in time from the first beginnings of Redemption; but what difference does this make when the benefits thereof are perennial and immortal? He who once hath restored human nature ruined by sin the same preserveth and will preserve it for ever. "He gave Himself a redemption for all" (1 Timothy ii., 6)."In Christ all shall be made alive" (1 Corinthians xv., 22). "And of His Kingdom there shall be no end" (Luke i., 33). Hence by God's eternal decree the salvation of all men, both severally and collectively, depends upon Jesus Christ. Those who abandon Him become guilty by the very fact, in their blindness and folly, of their own ruin; whilst at the same time they do all that in them lies to bring about a violent reaction of mankind in the direction of that mass of evils and miseries from which the Redeemer in His mercy had freed them.

Those who go astray from the road wander far from the goal they aim at. Similarly, if the pure and true light of truth be rejected, men's minds must necessarily be darkened and their souls deceived by deplorably false ideas. What hope of salvation can they have who abandon the very principle and fountain of life? Christ alone is the Way, the Truth and the Life (John xiv., 6). If He be abandoned the three necessary conditions of salvation are removed.

It is surely unnecessary to prove, what experience constantly shows and what each individual feels in himself, even in the very midst of all temporal prosperity-that in God alone can the human will find absolute and perfect peace. God is the only end of man. All our life on earth is the truthful and exact image of a pilgrimage. Now Christ is the "Way," for we can never reach God, the supreme and ultimate good, by this toilsome and doubtful road of mortal life, except with Christ as our leader and guide. How so? Firstly and chiefly by His grace; but this would remain "void" in man if the precepts of His law were neglected. For, as was necessarily the case after Jesus Christ had won our salvation, He left behind Him His Law for the protection and welfare of the human race, under the guidance of which men, converted from evil life, might safely tend towards God. "Going, teach ye all nations . . . teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew xxviii., 19-20). "Keep my commandments" john xiv., 15). Hence it will be understood that in the Christian religion the first and most necessary condition is docility to the precepts of Jesus Christ, absolute loyalty of will towards Him as Lord and King. A serious duty, and one which oftentimes calls for strenuous labour, earnest endeavour, and perseverance! For although by Our Redeemer's grace human nature hath been regenerated, still there remains in each individual a certain debility and tendency to evil. Various natural appetites attract man on one side and the other; the allurements of the material world impel his soul to follow after what is pleasant rather than the law of Christ. Still we must strive our best and resist our natural inclinations with all our strength "unto the obedience of Christ." For unless they obey reason they become our masters, and carrying the whole man away from Christ, make him their slave. "Men of corrupt mind, who have made shipwreck of the faith, cannot help being slaves. . . They are slaves to a threefold concupiscence: of will, of pride, or of outward show" (St. Augustine, De Vera Religione, 37). In this contest every man must be prepared to undergo hard ships and troubles for Christ's sake. It is difficult to reject what so powerfully entices and delights. It is hard and painful to despise the supposed goods of the senses and of fortune for the will and precepts of Christ our Lord. But the Christian is absolutely obliged to be firm, and patient in suffering, if he wish to lead a Christian life. Have we forgotten of what Body and of what Head we are the members? "Having joy set before Him, He endured the Cross," and He bade us deny ourselves. The very dignity of human nature depends upon this disposition of mind. For, as even the ancient Pagan philosophy perceived, to be master of oneself and to make the lower part of the soul, obey the superior part, is so far from being a weakness of will that it is really a noble power, in consonance with right reason and most worthy of a man. Moreover, to bear and to suffer is the ordinary condition of man. Man can no more create for himself a life free from suffering and filled with all happiness that he can abrogate the decrees of his Divine Maker, who has willed that the consequences of original sin should be perpetual. It is reasonable, therefore, not to expect an end to troubles in this world, but rather to steel one's soul to bear troubles, by which we are taught to look forward with certainty to supreme happiness. Christ has not promised eternal bliss in heaven to riches, nor to a life of ease, to honours or to power, but to longsuffering and to tears, to the love of justice and to cleanness of heart.

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

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

 

Ideologues of one form of naturalism or another reject the Catholic Church and the binding nature of the Deposit of Faith, including her Social Teaching, entrusted to her by her Divine Founder and Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as they worship at the altar of other "gods," whether these be named Immanuel Kant, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Karl Marx, Georg Hegel, Saul Alinsky, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Dewey, Charles Darwin, Margaret Sanger, Herbert Spencer, Friedrich Nietchse, Leo Strauss or some other ideologue who has the "program" for the "well-ordered" civil state absent a complete and total subordination to the Catholic Church in all that pertains to the good of souls. And as the late Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn explained in his commencement address at Harvard University on June 8, 1978, the trend that is farthest to the "left" is always victorious when ideologues battle one another, making possible the rise of some form of Marxist totalitarianism:

As humanism in its development was becoming more and more materialistic, it also increasingly allowed concepts to be used first by socialism and then by communism, so that Karl Marx was able to say, in 1844, that "communism is naturalized humanism."

This statement has proved to be not entirely unreasonable. One does not see the same stones in the foundations of an eroded humanism and of any type of socialism: boundless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility (which under Communist regimes attains the stage of antireligious dictatorship); concentration on social structures with an allegedly scientific approach. (This last is typical of both the Age of Enlightenment and of Marxism.) It is no accident that all of communism's rhetorical vows revolve around Man (with a capital M) and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.

The interrelationship is such, moreover, that the current of materialism which is farthest to the left, and is hence the most consistent, always proves to be stronger, more attractive, and victorious. Humanism which has lost its Christian heritage cannot prevail in this competition. Thus during the past centuries and especially in recent decades, as the process became more acute, the alignment of forces was as follows: Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism could not stand up to communism.

 

The Wizard of Obama and his crew of statists are but the logical result of the leftist version of naturalism's internal consistency of appealing to fallen man's desire to believe that he is not responsible for any of his problems, that the civil state can "resolve"--or at least make better--his life here on earth by providing for material well-being, universal access to "health care" to assure one of a long physical life as one continues to offend God by the commission, objectively speaking, of one grave sin after another under cover of the civil law, and an endless array of pleasures and joys to occupy one's leisure time. Barrack Hussein Obama and his crew of statists have trained for decades for their opportunity to complete a coup de grace by which there shall be no turning back from their statism, no turning back, that is, barring the fulfillment of Our Lady's Fatima Message.

President Barrack Hussein Obama and his crew of statists do indeed believe in their secular religion. They believe that the civil state does indeed possess the authority and the power to control our daily lives. As leaders of what they believe is the "true secular church," outside of which there can be no secular salvation or even personal happiness here on earth, they believe that it is absolutely necessary to curb speech and action opposed to their "received" beliefs. This is what they and their ideological soul mates did with administrative impunity when they were in the halls of academe (and do I ever know this from first-hand experience, which is why I am not employed in my chosen field as a professor of political science), and it is what they are trying to do at present.

To wit, the Solicitor-General of the United States of America, Malcolm Stewart, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States of America on March 25, 2009. that "advocacy" speech could be curbed in accord with the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that was signed into law in 2003 by the "precursor" of the secular messiah, Obama, the penultimate "conservative" statist named President George Walker Bush. Although Malcolm Stewart is correct about the logical consequences of the hideous McCain-Feingold law, the Obama administration is giving every signal that it does indeed believe that "politically incorrect" speech can and must be curbed by all means necessary, that political and social and cultural "heresy" cannot and will not be tolerated in the Union of Soviet Socialist America:

WASHINGTON — A quirky case about a slashing documentary attacking Hillary Rodham Clinton would not seem to be the most obvious vehicle for a fundamental re-examination of the interplay between the First Amendment and campaign finance laws.

But by the end of an exceptionally lively argument at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, it seemed at least possible that five justices were prepared to overturn or significantly limit parts of the court’s 2003 decision upholding the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which regulates the role of money in politics.

Several of the court’s more conservative justices reacted with incredulity to a series of answers from a government lawyer about the scope of Congressional authority to limit political speech. The lawyer, Malcolm L. Stewart, said Congress has the power to ban political books, signs and Internet videos, if they are paid for by corporations and distributed not long before an election.

Mr. Stewart added that there was no difference in principle between the 90-minute documentary about Mrs. Clinton, “Hillary: The Movie,” and a 30-second television advertisement.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the government’s uncompromising position could have dire consequences for the McCain-Feingold law.

“If we think that the application of this to a 90-minute film is unconstitutional,” Justice Kennedy said, “then the whole statute should fall under your view because there’s no distinction between the two?”

Mr. Stewart said the two kinds of communications should rise or fall together, so long as each satisfied a test set out by the court in a decision in 2007. That decision said restrictions in the McCain-Feingold law applied only to communications “susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.”

“Hillary: The Movie,” a documentary with elements of polemic and advocacy journalism, was produced by Citizens United, a conservative nonprofit corporation. It was released during the Democratic presidential primaries last year, and a lower court said it could not be broadcast within 30 days of those elections.

Justice David H. Souter quoted snippets of the film’s characterization of Mrs. Clinton, who was running for president and is now secretary of state.

“She is ruthless, cunning, dishonest, do anything for power, will speak dishonestly, reckless, a congenital liar, sorely lacking in qualifications, not qualified as commander in chief,” Justice Souter recited.

“I mean,” he concluded, “this sounds to me like campaign advocacy.”

Justice Stephen G. Breyer was more circumspect. “It is not a musical comedy,” he said of the film.

Other justices pressed Mr. Stewart for a limiting principle to his argument.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked, for instance, whether a campaign biography in book form could be banned. Mr. Stewart said yes, so long as it was paid for with a corporation’s general treasury money, as opposed to its political action committee.

“That’s pretty incredible,” Justice Alito said.

Justice Alito replaced Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, an author of the 5-to-4 decision upholding the McCain-Feingold law in 2003. Justice Alito is more skeptical of campaign finance regulation than Justice O’Connor was.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked whether it would make a difference if a 500-page book had a single sentence in it that said “vote for X.” Then he asked about “a sign held up in Lafayette Park saying vote for so and so.”

If corporate money were used to pay for the book or the sign, Mr. Stewart said, Congress would have the power to ban them before elections.

Justice Breyer tried to steer the conversation away from speech and toward money.

“You can’t prohibit all those things,” he said, referring to books, videos and the like. “What you do is put limitations on the payment for them.”

The McCain-Feingold law of 2002 applies only to broadcast, cable or satellite transmission of “electioneering communications” paid for by corporations or labor unions in the 30 days before a presidential primary and in the 60 days before the general election. That leaves out old technologies, like newspapers, and new ones, like YouTube; and it includes an exception for broadcast news reports, commentaries and editorials.

Theodore B. Olson, a lawyer for Citizens United, said the law was inconsistent in its treatment of corporations. Television networks owned by General Electric and Disney are not subject to the McCain-Feingold law, Mr. Olson said, but General Motors is. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press made a similar point in a brief supporting Citizens United.

If the court were inclined to rule narrowly for Mr. Olson’s side in the case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, No. 08-205, it could find that the documentary is not the sort of communication covered by McCain-Feingold law. Or it could say that that the proposed distribution of the film on a cable video-on-demand service would not be covered by the law.

But Mr. Stewart’s answers to the justice’s hypothetical questions may have pushed the court toward a broader ruling.

“If we accept your constitutional argument,” Chief Justice Roberts told Mr. Stewart, “we’re establishing a precedent that you yourself say would extend to banning the book.”

Justice Antonin Scalia said he was “a little disoriented.”

“We are dealing with a constitutional provision, are we not, the one that I remember which said Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press?” Justice Scalia asked. He was referring, of course, to the First Amendment. (Justices Seem Skeptical of Scope of Campaign Law)

 

As believers in a "true secular church," the leaders of the Wizard of Obama's administration have, aping the Bolsheviks and Nazis and Maoists and Castroites and other totalitarians, perverted and distorted a true concept, the duty of the civil state to censor speech that is offensive to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and is thus injurious to the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross, by believing that civil state has a fundamental and manifest duty to censure speech that denies the "truths" of naturalism (statism, moral relativism, environmentalism, feminism, legal positivism, evolutionism, "diversity," which is a slogan for the acceptance of the perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments). Like all other totalitarians, the Obamaites ape and pervert and distort Catholic teaching, which denies the unfettered "right" of "free speech" and "free press" to propagate errors offensive to God and thus injurious to souls and to all social order, by attempting to curb speech considered to harmful for the "building" of a "community" of "understanding" and "cooperation" and "diversity."

The institutionalization of Barack Hussein Obama's Union of Soviet Socialist America, which comes replete with substantial government control of the economic sector that is reeling from its own false premises and its concomitant rejection of the principles outlined by Pope Leo XIII in Rerurm Novarum, May 15, 1891, and Quadragesima Anno, May 15, 1931, is premised upon the control of speech and thought, which is why he used vagueness and ambiguity when discussing his beliefs during his presidential campaign in 2007 and 2008 and why his apologists reacted with righteous indignation when commentators, including some who taught with Obama during his brief time as a constitutional law professor, pointed out that he, Obama, is indeed a Marxist and would govern as one.

Barack Hussein Obama is acting quickly to assert government control over large sections of American life, including the family.

Naturalists have long recognized that they must control the minds of the young, especially to wrest control of those young people who are so "unfortunate" to have parents attached to ideas and beliefs that are in direct opposition to their own. A program of indoctrination has long existed in America's concentration camps, otherwise known as "public schools," as Pope Leo XIII noted in Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884, and as Pope Pius XI noted in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

If these be taken away, as the naturalists and Freemasons desire, there will immediately be no knowledge as to what constitutes justice and injustice, or upon what principle morality is founded. And, in truth, the teaching of morality which alone finds favor with the sect of Freemasons, and in which they contend that youth should be instructed, is that which they call "civil," and "independent," and "free," namely, that which does not contain any religious belief. But, how insufficient such teaching is, how wanting in soundness, and how easily moved by every impulse of passion, is sufficiently proved by its sad fruits, which have already begun to appear. For, wherever, by removing Christian education, this teaching has begun more completely to rule, there goodness and integrity of morals have begun quickly to perish, monstrous and shameful opinions have grown up, and the audacity of evil deeds has risen to a high degree. All this is commonly complained of and deplored; and not a few of those who by no means wish to do so are compelled by abundant evidence to give not infrequently the same testimony.

Moreover, human nature was stained by original sin, and is therefore more disposed to vice than to virtue. For a virtuous life it is absolutely necessary to restrain the disorderly movements of the soul, and to make the passions obedient to reason. In this conflict human things must very often be despised, and the greatest labors and hardships must be undergone, in order that reason may always hold its sway. But the naturalists and Freemasons, having no faith in those things which we have learned by the revelation of God, deny that our first parents sinned, and consequently think that free will is not at all weakened and inclined to evil. On the contrary, exaggerating rather the power and the excellence of nature, and placing therein alone the principle and rule of justice, they cannot even imagine that there is any need at all of a constant struggle and a perfect steadfastness to overcome the violence and rule of our passions.

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 Quadregesimo; 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. (Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884.)

In fact it must never be forgotten that the subject of Christian education is man whole and entire, soul united to body in unity of nature, with all his faculties natural and supernatural, such as right reason and revelation show him to be; man, therefore, fallen from his original estate, but redeemed by Christ and restored to the supernatural condition of adopted son of God, though without the preternatural privileges of bodily immortality or perfect control of appetite. There remain therefore, in human nature the effects of original sin, the chief of which are weakness of will and disorderly inclinations.

"Folly is bound up in the heart of a child and the rod of correction shall drive it away." Disorderly inclinations then must be corrected, good tendencies encouraged and regulated from tender childhood, and above all the mind must be enlightened and the will strengthened by supernatural truth and by the means of grace, without which it is impossible to control evil impulses, impossible to attain to the full and complete perfection of education intended by the Church, which Christ has endowed so richly with divine doctrine and with the Sacraments, the efficacious means of grace.

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.

But what is worse is the claim, not only vain but false, irreverent and dangerous, to submit to research, experiment and conclusions of a purely natural and profane order, those matters of education which belong to the supernatural order; as for example questions of priestly or religious vocation, and in general the secret workings of grace which indeed elevate the natural powers, but are infinitely superior to them, and may nowise be subjected to physical laws, for "the Spirit breatheth where He will." (Pope Pius XI, Divnii Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

 

The Obama administration, aping the Bolsheviks of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, want to leave "no child behind" when it comes to the complete indoctrination of the "revealed truths" of statism, which is why the "mandatory volunteerism" act  ("Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education" Act) that was passed by the United States House of Representatives on March 18, 2009, has been proposed as a means of indoctrinating those children who have been "denied" the benefits" of state-sponsored ideological indoctrination in public schools (or the conciliar version of such indoctrination in formerly Catholic schools now in the control, at least for the most part, admitting a few exceptions here and there, of the conciliar revolutionaries). This is a program that builds on the state-sponsored coopting of the Natural Law right of parents to be the principal educators of their children by means of public schools and state-mandated curricula by coercing our children into "volunteer service" as they are "educated" in things that are contrary to their eternal salvation.

The Obama administration's attacks on the integrity of the family, which build upon the George Walker Bush's attacks on the integrity of the family by means of the "no child left behind" program and its funding of domestic and international "family planning programs that deny the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of the transmission of new life and actually funded the chemical assassinations of millions upon millions of innocent preborn children here and around the world, are simply the statist "end game," if you will, of attacks on the family that have been underway since Martin Luther endorsed divorce in the Sixteenth Century and have been waged with particular virulence by the forces of naturalism ever since.

Pope Leo XIII summarized the nature of these attacks in Arcanum, February 10, 1890, comparing the modern attacks on marriage and the family to those advanced by the Roman emperors, who were indeed penultimate statists in their own right:

Nevertheless, the naturalists, as well as all who profess that they worship above all things the divinity of the State, and strive to disturb whole communities with such wicked doctrines, cannot escape the charge of delusion. Marriage has God for its Author, and was from the very beginning a kind of foreshadowing of the Incarnation of His Son; and therefore there abides in it a something holy and religious; not extraneous, but innate; not derived from men, but implanted by nature. Innocent III. therefore. and Honorius III, our predecessors, affirmed not falsely nor rashly that a sacrament of marriage existed ever amongst the faithful and unbelievers. We call to witness the monuments of antiquity, as also the manners and customs of those people who, being the most civilized, had the greatest knowledge of law and equity. In the minds of all of them it was a fixed and foregone conclusion that, when marriage was thought of, it was thought of as conjoined with religion and holiness. Hence, among those, marriages were commonly celebrated with religious ceremonies, under the authority of pontiffs, and with the ministry of priests. So mighty, even in the souls ignorant of heavenly doctrine, was the force of nature, of the remembrance of their origin, and of the conscience of the human race. As, then, marriage is holy by its own power, in its own nature, and of itself, it ought not to be regulated and administered by the will of civil rulers, but by the divine authority of the Church, which alone in sacred matters professes the office of teaching.

Next, the dignity of the sacrament must be considered, for through addition of the sacrament the marriages of Christians have become far the noblest of all matrimonial unions. But to decree and ordain concerning the sacrament is, by the will of Christ Himself, so much a part of the power and duty of the Church that it is plainly absurd to maintain that even the very smallest fraction of such power has been transferred to the civil ruler.

Lastly should be borne in mind the great weight and crucial test of history, by which it is plainly proved that the legislative and judicial authority of which We are speaking has been freely and constantly used by the Church, even in times when some foolishly suppose the head of the State either to have consented to it or connived at it. It would, for instance, be incredible and altogether absurd to assume that Christ our Lord condemned the long-standing practice of polygamy and divorce by authority delegated to Him by the procurator of the province, or the principal ruler of the Jews. And it would be equally extravagant to think that, when the Apostle Paul taught that divorces and incestuous marriages were not lawful, it was because Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero agreed with him or secretly commanded him so to teach. No man in his senses could ever be persuaded that the Church made so many laws about the holiness and indissolubility of marriage, and the marriages of slaves with the free-born, by power received from Roman emperors, most hostile to the Christian name, whose strongest desire was to destroy by violence and murder the rising Church of Christ. Still less could anyone believe this to be the case, when the law of the Church was sometimes so divergent from the civil law that Ignatius the Martyr, Justin, Athenagoras, and Tertullian publicly denounced as unjust and adulterous certain marriages which had been sanctioned by imperial law.

Furthermore, after all power had devolved upon the Christian emperors, the supreme pontiffs and bishops assembled in council persisted with the same independence and consciousness of their right in commanding or forbidding in regard to marriage whatever they judged to be profitable or expedient for the time being, however much it might seem to be at variance with the laws of the State. It is well known that, with respect to the impediments arising from the marriage bond, through vow, disparity of worship, blood relationship, certain forms of crime, and from previously plighted troth, many decrees were issued by the rulers of the Church at the Councils of Granada, Arles, Chalcedon, the second of Milevum, and others, which were often widely different from the decrees sanctioned by the laws of the empire. Furthermore, so far were Christian princes from arrogating any power in the matter of Christian marriage that they on the contrary acknowledged and declared that it belonged exclusively in all its fullness to the Church. In fact, Honorius, the younger Theodosius, and Justinian, also, hesitated not to confess that the only power belonging to them in relation to marriage was that of acting as guardians and defenders of the holy canons. If at any time they enacted anything by their edicts concerning impediments of marriage, they voluntarily explained the reason, affirming that they took it upon themselves so to act, by leave and authority of the Church, whose judgment they were wont to appeal to and reverently to accept in all questions that concerned legitimacy and divorce; as also in all those points which in any way have a necessary connection with the marriage bond. The Council of Trent, therefore, had the clearest right to define that it is in the Church's power "to establish diriment impediments of matrimony," and that "matrimonial causes pertain to ecclesiastical judges."

Let no one, then, be deceived by the distinction which some civil jurists have so strongly insisted upon -- the distinction, namely, by virtue of which they sever the matrimonial contract from the sacrament, with intent to hand over the contract to the power and will of the rulers of the State, while reserving questions concerning the sacrament of the Church. A distinction, or rather severance, of this kind cannot be approved; for certain it is that in Christian marriage the contract is inseparable from the sacrament, and that, for this reason, the contract cannot be true and legitimate without being a sacrament as well. For Christ our Lord added to marriage the dignity of a sacrament; but marriage is the contract itself, whenever that contract is lawfully concluded. . . .

Truly, it is hardly possible to describe how great are the evils that flow from divorce. Matrimonial contracts are by it made variable; mutual kindness is weakened; deplorable inducements to unfaithfulness are supplied; harm is done to the education and training of children; occasion is afforded for the breaking up of homes; the seeds of dissension are sown among families; the dignity of womanhood is lessened and brought low, and women run the risk of being deserted after having ministered to the pleasures of men. Since, then, nothing has such power to lay waste families and destroy the mainstay of kingdoms as the corruption of morals, it is easily seen that divorces are in the highest degree hostile to the prosperity of families and States, springing as they do from the depraved morals of the people, and, as experience shows us, opening out a way to every kind of evil-doing in public and in private life.

Further still, if the matter be duly pondered, we shall clearly see these evils to be the more especially dangerous, because, divorce once being tolerated, there will be no restraint powerful enough to keep it within the bounds marked out or presurmised. Great indeed is the force of example, and even greater still the might of passion. With such incitements it must needs follow that the eagerness for divorce, daily spreading by devious ways, will seize upon the minds of many like a virulent contagious disease, or like a flood of water bursting through every barrier. These are truths that doubtlessly are all clear in themselves, but they will become clearer yet if we call to mind the teachings of experience. So soon as the road to divorce began to be made smooth by law, at once quarrels, jealousies, and judicial separations largely increased: and such shamelessness of life followed that men who had been in favor of these divorces repented of what they had done, and feared that, if they did not carefully seek a remedy by repealing the law, the State itself might come to ruin. The Romans of old are said to have shrunk with horror from the first example of divorce, but ere long all sense of decency was blunted in their soul; the meager restraint of passion died out, and the marriage vow was so often broken that what some writers have affirmed would seem to be true -- namely, women used to reckon years not by the change of consuls, but of their husbands. In like manner, at the beginning, Protestants allowed legalized divorces in certain although but few cases, and yet from the affinity of circumstances of like kind, the number of divorces increased to such extent in Germany, America, and elsewhere that all wise thinkers deplored the boundless corruption of morals, and judged the recklessness of the laws to be simply intolerable.

Even in Catholic States the evil existed. For whenever at any time divorce was introduced, the abundance of misery that followed far exceeded all that the framers of the law could have foreseen. In fact, many lent their minds to contrive all kinds of fraud and device, and by accusations of cruelty, violence, and adultery to feign grounds for the dissolution of the matrimonial bond of which they had grown weary; and all this with so great havoc to morals that an amendment of the laws was deemed to be urgently needed.

Can anyone, therefore, doubt that laws in favor of divorce would have a result equally baneful and calamitous were they to be passed in these our days? There exists not, indeed, in the projects and enactments of men any power to change the character and tendency with things have received from nature. Those men, therefore, show but little wisdom in the idea they have formed of the well-being of the commonwealth who think that the inherent character of marriage can be perverted with impunity; and who, disregarding the sanctity of religion and of the sacrament, seem to wish to degrade and dishonor marriage more basely than was done even by heathen laws. Indeed, if they do not change their views, not only private families, but all public society, will have unceasing cause to fear lest they should be miserably driven into that general confusion and overthrow of order which is even now the wicked aim of socialists and communists. Thus we see most clearly how foolish and senseless it is to expect any public good from divorce, when, on the contrary, it tends to the certain destruction of society.

 

The monster civil state that has arisen as a result of the evils that have flowed so freely in the wake of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolt and the rise of Judeo-Masonry means to take the place of the basic building block of society, the family, which has been laid waste by the indoctrination of public schooling, the propagandizing of the mass media, the prevalence of divorce, the evils of contraception and abortion and the gradual acceptance of immodest of dress, indecency of speech and outright perversity in violation of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

Countless numbers of children, those, that is, who have managed to be conceived and to make it out of their mothers' wombs alive, have become veritable "wards of the state" because their parents are never home for them and/or because they are shunted off in the pre-school years to day care centers and in their school years to after-school care centers, sent away to camps during the summer and to Masonic "sports leagues" on the weekends. The civil state has indeed become the "big daddy" to whom many adults, longing for the true love unto eternity that their parents never gave them, are willing to surrender their legitimate freedoms in order to realize an illusory "security" or an equally illusory "indemnification" from any problem that might arise in the course of their lives.

There is no naturalistic, religiously indifferentist, nondenominational, inter-denominational, political, legal or "constitutional" means to turn back what has become, yes, of course in a de facto sense, the Union of Soviet Socialist America. No, none whatsoever.

The path to turning back the evils of the day runs through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, which was pierced by the Fourth through Seven Swords of Sorrow during the events of her Divine Son's Passion and Death during this very week of weeks, Holy Week, the week during which our salvation was wrought for us on the wood of the Holy Cross. The Holy Cross of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, is the one and only standard of true human freedom, that which comes from our liberation from the power of sin and eternal death over us in our daily lives. It is the grace that He won for us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and that flows into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, the Mediatrix of All Graces who stood so valiantly at foot of that same Holy Cross, that enables us to live as truly free men who subordinate our minds and wills at all times to His Deposit of Faith as He has entrusted to His Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church alone has the teaching and the supernatural helps to lead men to act rightly in their own personal lives and thus to organize themselves socially to pursue the common temporal good in a truly limited government that takes account of and is of assistance to the pursuit of man's Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise. This is a truth that has been rejected by the lords of Modernity, such as the Wizard of Obama and his team of statists. This is a truth that has been rejected as well by the lords of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, men who believe that the civil state has no obligation to recognize the true religion and that adherents of false religions can contribute to the "betterment" of nations and the world.

Alas, Christ the King rode into Jerusalem on the first Palm Sunday on the lowly donkey. He has been dethroned, albeit temporarily, from His rightful place in the hearts of men and in the lives of their nations. Sinners though we may be, it is out duty to plant the seeds for the restoration of His Social Kingship as the lords of Modernity and Modernist are consigned to the dustbin of history forever.

We go about planting seeds for the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King in many ways, first of all by cooperating with His graces, sent to us through the hands of Our Lady, to root out sin and unruly passions from our own souls. Christ the King cannot rule over our nations unless He first rules over own hearts and souls, unless we consecrate ourselves to Him totally through Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, unless our homes are enthroned to His Most Sacred Heart and the same Immaculate Heart of Mary, unless we are willing to make sacrifices for Him joyfully as we embrace with love and gratitude each and every single one of the crosses that are sent to us on a daily basis.

The mysteries contained in Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary summarize the events of our salvation from the time of her Divine Son's Incarnation to that of her own Coronation as Queen of Heaven and Earth. The Sorrowful Mysteries summarize the events that unfolded this very week, Holy Week, events that are re-presented in an unbloody manner on altars of Sacrifice as true bishops or true priests offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (and not the Protestant and Masonic service that was promulgated by Giovanni Montini/Paul V on April 3, 1969!).

We must pray these Sorrowful Mysteries again this week as we keep Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother company at Holy Mass today and tomorrow, Spy Wednesday, and on Maundy Thursday and at the Mass of the Presanctified on Good Friday, the only day of the year in which Holy Mass itself is not offered.

We must pray these Sorrowful Mysteries again and again as we keep Our Lord company at the Altar of Repose following Mass on Maundy Thursday.

We must pray these Sorrowful Mysteries we attempt to make reparation for our many sins that have been so responsible for dethroning Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in our own souls and have thus played a role in preventing the restoration of His Social Kingship over our nations.

We must pray these Sorrowful Mysteries as we contemplate these words of Pope Saint Pius X that stand in sharp contrast to the beliefs of the lords of Modernity in the world and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism:

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

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

 

We must remember that the forces we are not fighting earthly powers. The likes of Obama are merely earthly manifestations of the forces of darkness that have enveloped large parts of the world after first enveloping large numbers of souls. Saint Paul warns us to fight these forces of darkness in our own lives lest we be overcome by them:

Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace: (Ephesians 6: 11-15.)

 

We are now at the summit of Lent. The Paschal Triduum of the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ commences on Maundy Thursday in just two days. It is more important than ever in these days to try to make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our sins and those of the whole world. We may not live to see the fruit of our efforts in our own lifetimes. However, the seeds that we plant now might, please God and with Our Lady's maternal intercession, flower in the vanquishing of the lies of Modernity in the world and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism once and for all.

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now so that the Union of Soviet Socialist America may become the Catholic States of America as men are converted to the true Faith and embrace with joy the Social Reign of Christ the King, Who was nailed to a Cross to redeem us to that we might might know liberation from the power of sin and eternal death here and thus be ready to share His Kingdom in Heaven for all eternity?

.

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.

See also: A Litany of Saints