Part Two
by
Thomas A. Droleskey
As noted in part one of this two-part series, most people who roam around loose and have the power to vote, including many Catholics who are as of yet in the conciliar structures, have utterly no clue about the Ten Commandments while others have only a vague and mostly deformed knowledge of them. Non-Catholics who, including Protestants, Jews and Mohammedans, teach warped versions of the Ten Commandments that not from God as He has entrusted His Commandments exclusively to the teaching authority of His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.
Then again, of course, it is not all that amazing that that most people alive today do not know much, if anything about the Ten Commandments when the conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" and priests/presbyters break many of these Commandments wantonly and brazenly, frequently in public displays that no longer shock the consciences of most Catholics as they have been numbed by years of the ethos of conciliarism.
Few Catholics, including many, although not all, traditionally-minded Catholics yet attached to the structures of that which is the counterfeit ape of the Catholic Church, care that their "popes" have called places of false worship as mosques and synagogues as "sacred" or that these "popes" have treated non-Catholic "ministers" and "rabbis" and "imams" and Buddhist and Hindu "priests" as "holy men" who are pleasing God by offering their acts of false worship to the devil. All but a tiny, tiny handful of people, many of whom are busy making war on each other to say much, if anything at all, about the apostasies of Ratzinger/Benedict, have been convinced, contrary to all right reason, have been convinced by the scandalous behavior of the conciliar "popes" that Catholic teaching can and has "changed," that God does indeed look favorably upon all religions.
Pope Leo XIII explained very succinctly in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, that it is absurd to say that one religion can be as "good" as another:
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.
The conciliar "popes" have conveyed a practical indifference to the truth of the true religion, Catholicism, by their treating false religions, each of which is loathed by God Himself, as credible means of serving God and pleasing Him while "building up" the mythical "civilization of love." By so doing, of course, the conciliar "popes" blaspheme quite publicly the true God of Divine Revelation, He Who has appointed the Catholic Church as the one and only means of personal salvation and of social order. Who cares? Who defends the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Holy Trinity? Who? Who takes seriously these words of Pope Leo the Great?
But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59.)
Although these points have been made repeatedly on this site, the past immediate head Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and its current head, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, of this counterfeit ape of the Catholic Church, have encouraged their "bishops" to treat false religions as having roles appointed by God Himself to save souls and to help provide for the common temporal good of a nation, which must be pursued in light 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 Heaven. These conciliar "popes," however, reject this truth, having embraced what was called a heresy by Pope Pius VII in Post Tam Diuturnas, April 29, 1914, and insanity by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832, that is, of course, religious liberty, which is enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and is exalted by the "Second" Vatican Council's Dignitatis Humane, December 7, 1965.
Upon what rational basis, therefore, can any Catholic attached to the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes," including "Pope" Benedict XVI, oppose the building of a Mohammedan mosque at what used to be the site of the twin towers of the World Trade Center in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, that has been referred to as "Ground Zero" ever since the tragic events of September 11, 2001? Anyone who professes "loyalty" to the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes" has no basis to object to the building of this mosque. And those who consider themselves loyal to the mind of the "founding fathers," those men who had a founding hatred for Christ the King, cannot do so as they enshrined the principle of "freedom of religion," which also means freedom from religion (Article VI of the Constitution requires no religious test for the holding of public office, something that Americanist Catholics says was meant to protect the tiny Catholic minority then extant in the new country but which was meant also as a protection of "freethinkers" and those involved in Judeo-Masonry).
Indeed, the government of the United States of America made clear its friendship toward Mohammedanism, called a "religion of peace" by former President George Walker Bush, and a "great religion" by Barack Hussein Obama, who may or may not have made a slip of the tongue when he said 'my Muslim faith' when being interviewed by Chris Wallace of the Fox News Channel in 2008.
It was of course, the same Barack Hussein Obama who made it very clear in a speech in Cairo, Egypt on June 4, 2009, that the 1797 Treaty between the United States of America and Tripoli contains an expression of "respect" for Mohammedanism, demonstrating once again the anti-Incarnational spirit of Americanism, an important building block of the New World Order and of concilairism, and its "respect" for false religions that are hideous in the sight of God and can never be the foundation of the salvation of the souls individual men or the basis of a truly just and well-ordered society.
Article Eleven of the Tripoli Treaty also declares that the United States of America is not a "Christian" nation, which is certainly true as it does not recognize the only true Christian religion, Catholicism. Remember, individual Protestants may be Christians if validly baptized. Protestantism, which has spawned over thirty-three thousand mutant variations, is a heresy. It is series of thousands of false religions, each of which is hideous in the sight of God. Thus it is that these words of Article Eleven of the Tripoli Treaty are quite true.
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries (Article 11 of the Treaty between the United States of America and Tripoli, June 10, 1797.)
The President of the United States of America who signed this treaty, John Adams, hated Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and mocked Him and His Most Blessed Mother, making him, of predisposed, to accept with tranquility a false religion, Mohammedanism, that denies the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:
Can a free government possibly exist with the Roman Catholic religion? (John Adams, Letter to Thomas Jefferson, May 19, 1821)
I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved -- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced! (John Adams, Letter to Thomas Jefferson, quoted in 200 Years of Disbelief, by James Hauck)
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter. But we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away {with} all this artificial scaffolding…" (11 April, 1823, John Adams letter to Thomas Jefferson, Adams-Jefferson Letters, ed. Lester J. Cappon, II, 594).
Ah, yes, the "joys" of "religious liberty." The "joys" of a "religious liberty" founded on an indifference to the true Faith and an acceptance of all religions, including those that deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, leads to the triumph of practical atheism as the lowest common denominator of a society.
Yes, it is true that those of us in the United States of America live in a "pluralist" society live alongside those of many different "faiths" or of no faith whatsoever have to live within the context of the realities of our situation. Holy Mother Church does not expect the impossible of her children. She recognizes the realities of the situations in which her children live. And thus it may happen that the evil represented by the public display of false religions might have to be tolerated in order not to disturb the common good and thus to produce unnecessary conflict and violence that would do no good for the cause of converting the souls of unbelievers.
Pope Leo XIII, writing in Libertas
Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888, cited Saint Thomas Aquinas's teaching on the toleration of evil to explain that it may be necessary in some instances to tolerate some evils for the sake of preventing others:
Yet, with the discernment of a true mother, the Church weighs the great burden of human weakness, and well knows the course down which the minds and actions of men are in this our age being borne. For this reason, while not conceding any right to anything save what is true and honest, she does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoiding some greater evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good. God Himself in His providence, though infinitely good and powerful, permits evil to exist in the world, partly that greater good may not be impeded, and partly that greater evil may not ensue. In the government of States it is not forbidden to imitate the Ruler of the world; and, as the authority of man is powerless to prevent every evil, it has (as St. Augustine says) to overlook and leave unpunished many things which are punished, and rightly, by Divine Providence. But if, in such circumstances, for the sake of the common good (and this is the only legitimate reason), human law may or even should tolerate evil, it may not and should not approve or desire evil for its own sake; for evil of itself, being a privation of good, is opposed to the common welfare which every legislator is bound to desire and defend to the best of his ability. In this, human law must endeavor to imitate God, who, as St. Thomas teaches, in allowing evil to exist in the world, "neither wills evil to be done, nor wills it not to be done, but wills only to permit it to be done; and this is good.'' This saying of the Angelic Doctor contains briefly the whole doctrine of the permission of evil.
The existence of a Mohammedan mosque may be tolerated to prevent greater evils. Unlike what many, although not all, of the conciliarists believe and assert publicly, however, a Mohammedan mosque has no "right" from God to exist as it is a place of devil worship that God Himself detests and loathes. And a nation organized around Catholic principles and recognizes the authority of the Catholic Church to exercise the Social Reign of Christ the King would recognize the
What has Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI himself said about mosques?
Places of worship, like this splendid Al-Hussein Bin Talal mosque named after the revered late King, stand out like jewels across the earth’s surface. From the ancient to the modern, the magnificent to the humble, they all point to the divine, to the Transcendent One, to the Almighty. And through the centuries these sanctuaries have drawn men and women into their sacred space to pause, to pray, to acknowledge the presence of the Almighty, and to recognize that we are all his creatures. (Speech to Muslim religious leaders, members of the Diplomatic Corps and Rectors of universities in Jordan in front of the mosque al-Hussein bin Talal in Amman)
I cordially thank the Grand Mufti, Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, together with the Director of the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, Sheikh Mohammed Azzam al-Khatib al-Tamimi, and the Head of the Awquaf Council, Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab, for the welcome they have extended to me on your behalf. I am deeply grateful for the invitation to visit this sacred place, and I willingly pay my respects to you and the leaders of the Islamic community in Jerusalem. (Courtesy visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the Mount of the Temple. May 12, 2009; see a condemnation of this blithe spirit of false ecumenism as found in The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion; see also Ratzinger/Benedict's esteeming of the symbols of five false religions at the John Paul II Cultural Center, Washington, D.C., Thursday, April 17, 2008, See for yourself, April 17, 2008 - 6:15 p.m. - Interreligious Gathering.)
Why beat up on the self-styled "billionaire playboy" pro-abort named Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor For Life (or so it would appear) of the City of New York, New York) for being so ebullient over the proposed mosque at "Ground Zero"? The exalted "founding fathers" would be there with their Masonic aprons around their waists to lay the foundation for the place if they were alive today.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI will probably send the conciliar "archbishop" of New York, Timothy I am to be a happy "bishop" Dolan, to represent him at the dedication of the place. Ratzinger/Benedict, if he could go there himself, might even offer a prayer without invoking any of the Three Divine Persons of the Most Blessed Trinity or without making the Sign of the Cross when praying (as he did not do when praying privately or when reading his generic prayer at "Ground Zero" on Sunday, April 20, 2008, although he did give a blessing in the Name of the Most Blessed Trinity upon his departure; see
See for yourself, April 20, 2008 - Ceremony at Ground Zero).
Why beat up on Michael Bloomberg? Why all of the commotion and hubbub? Why? The American Constitution, a product of the heresies of Protestantism and of the false, naturalistic, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian errors of the "Enlightenment" that constitute the very heart and soul of Judeo-Masonry, is the problem as it was the American Constitution's embrace of religious liberty several years in advance of the French revolutionaries' constitution of 1792 that helped pave the wave for the very "religious liberty" that Ratzinger/Benedict praised in his Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service at that now demolished shrine of baseball evil, Yankee Stadium, on Sunday, April 20, 2008, just a few hours after appearing at "Ground Zero":
In this land of religious liberty, Catholics found freedom not only to practice their faith, but also to participate fully in civic life, bringing their deepest moral convictions to the public square and cooperating with their neighbors in shaping a vibrant, democratic society. Today's celebration is more than an occasion of gratitude for graces received. It is also a summons to move forward with firm resolve to use wisely the blessings of freedom, in order to build a future of hope for coming generations.
Ah, yes, their deepest moral convictions. That's why Catholics in states such as Rhode Island, where Catholics constituted sixty-two percent of the state's population (it's down to around forty-six percent today, still the highest in the United States of America, however), vote rather consistently for pro-abortion Democratic candidates for the United States Senate and and to serve as President of the country. Ah, yes, their deepest moral convictions. Just brings a tear to the eye when you consider the Catholics of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who voted consistently for pro-aborts such the late Edward Moore Kennedy and those of the State of New York who voted for pro-aborts Mario Matthew Cuomo and for Daniel Patrick Moynihan and for Hillary Rodham Clinton and who will vote this year in droves for the pro-abortion Andrew Cuomo to be their next governor. Ah, yes, their deepest moral convictions.
How can any Catholic attached to the conciliar structures who wants to be faithful to the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes" oppose that mosque at "Ground Zero" when their "pope" has praised "religious liberty" and has himself said that the "coexistence of religions," not Catholicism alone, is the foundation of "peace"! (See RELIGIONS ARE A FORCE FOR PEACE AND RECONCILIATION .)
What Commandments? Certainly not the First and the Second.
Enough. My "shelf life," that is to say, the amount of time in a day these days in which I am able to work without being very fatigued, expired several hours ago. Enough of the madness of Modernity in the world and in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
As has been noted constantly on this site (and in my writing for over a decade before this site was launched), we are witnessing the logical decay that must exist in a world that denies the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised the Catholic Church that He Himself founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. Men and their nations must descend into madness when they are not guided by the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.
As I noted in my part one of this brief series, although I am tired and have been occupied even this current week with all kinds of medical examinations and procedures, I will indeed attempt to repeat the truths of Catholic Social Teaching until I am entire unable to do so, please God and by means of the intercessory power of His Most Blessed Mother that that day is still many, many years away. No matter the reduced number of articles that will appear on this site in the future, however, I will continue to defend the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen for as long as Our Lady sends me the graces won for us by her Divine Son to do so.
Remember to honor Our Lady and her devoted son to whom she gave her Most Holy Rosary, Saint Dominic de Guzman, O.P., by continuing to participate in Bishop Robert Fidelis McKenna's Rosary Crusade. May we offer up with joy and gratitude the crosses of the present moment to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary in reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
