With Zeal For Falsehood
by Thomas A. Droleskey
The inexorable logic of naturalism is such that those who are trapped within the confines of a world defined by the merely natural believe that there is no "escape" from human problems other than by purely human, completely natural means. Patient endurance of suffering in reparation for one's sins as a consecrated slave of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother, Mary our Immaculate Queen? Understanding that each cross that we are called to endure has been sent us by the good God, Who never permits any of us to suffer beyond our capacity? Understanding that nothing we suffer in this life, be it personal or social, is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His Passion and Death and caused His Most Blessed Mother to suffer as those Seven Swords of Sorrow were plunged through and through her Immaculate Heart? Praying for and forgiving our persecutors as we will their good, the ultimate expression of which is the salvation of their immortal souls as members of the Catholic Church? Seeking justice in matters temporal without vengeance or malice and with a Catholic sense of due proportion?
No, those who see the world in terms that are merely natural believe that "they" can "solve" personal and social problems on their own and/or in association with others without submitting themselves to the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord, Christ the King, has entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication and without having belief in, access to or cooperation with Sanctifying Grace.
Those possessed of the Americanist mentality of naturalism believe that the madness of elections and petition drives will "save the day," a madness that has such a hold on the minds of Catholic Americans all across and up and down the vast expanse of the ecclesiastical divide in this time of apostasy and betrayal that there is a widely held misbelief that we can "petition" our way to "save" the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition and/or to "stop" this or that plan of the reigning caesars and caesarettes in the world.
Other naturalists, however, believe that it is by some type of "revolutionary" activity that social problems, whether real or imagined or exaggerated, can be "solved" by the use of armed force to overthrow an existing power structure. It is all too frequently the case that some of this who believe in the paradigm of so-called revolutionary activity do not see clearly that their desire to protest against one set of existing evils makes it possible for other progenitors of evil to exploit a given situation as they themselves are manipulated cleverly to serve as dupes for those progenitors of an alternative evil seize power and rule as dictatorially and unjustly as those currently in power.
To wit, at least a few of those who supported the French Revolution at its outset in 1789 believe that "moderate" reforms would be enacted after over a century of abuse of power by Kings Louis XIV and Louis XV as the French national treasury was looted by royal excess and extravagance and on the prosecution of needless foreign wars. Sound familiar? Thoughts of a possible reign of terror and the invention of the guillotine by the Jacobins to expedite mass executions of those who sympathized--or were deemed as possible sympathizers--of the Ancien Regime or the clergy were not entertained by those who "believed" that the events begun on July 14, 1789, would lead to the desecration of Catholic church buildings and the destruction of the relics of saints, including those of Saint Louis IX, King of France, and of Saint Vincent de Paul (save for his heart).
Similarly, very few of those who joined in the "revolutionary" case of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) had even read, no less understood, the writings of Karl Marx or Freidrich Engels. At least some of those who threw in their lot with Lenin as early as his failed 1903 revolution and the one that succeeded in 1917 as a Russia debilitated by war teetered on the brink of social anarchy believed that a class of murderous commissars would replace the authoritarian czars. Such people believed that a "revolution" would solve their problems. And thus it has always been--and will continue to be--in the case of social revolutions.
This is the case also with doctrinal and liturgical revolutionaries. Even Martin Luther and one of his chief supporters, the "Renaissance" "humanist" named Erasmus, were aghast at the consequences of the Protestant Revolution that Luther had unleashed, being unable to see or to accept the truth that a revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church cannot but bring diabolical consequences for men and for their nations:
The assumption that Protestantism brought a higher
and purer moral life to the nations that came under its influence does
not need elaborate refutation. It is a fact of uncontroverted history
that "public morality did at once deteriorate to an appalling degree
wherever Protestantism was introduced. Not to mention robberies of
church goods, brutal treatment meted out to the clergy, secular and
regular, who remained faithful, and the horrors of so many wars of
religion," we have the express testimony of [Martin] Luther himself and
several other leaders of the revolt, such as [Martin] Bucer and [Philip]
Melancthon, as to the evil effects of their teaching; and this
testimony is confirmed by contemporaries. Luther's own avowals on this
matter are numberless. Thus he writes:
"There is not one of our Evangelicals, who is not
seven times worse than before he belonged to us, stealing the goods of
others, lying, deceiving, eating, getting drunk, and indulging in every
vice, as if he had not received the Holy Word. If we have been delivered
from one spirit of evil, seven others worse than the first have come to
take its place."
"Men who live under the Gospel are more
uncharitable, more irascible, more greedy, more avaricious than they
were before as Papists."
Even Erasmus, who had at first favoured Luther's movement, was soon disillusioned. Thus he writes:
"The New Gospel has at least the advantage of
showing us a new race of men, haughty, impudent, cunning, blasphemous . .
. quarrellers, seditious, furious, to whom I have, to say truth, so
great an antipathy that if I knew a place in the world free of them, I
would not hesitate to take refuge therein."
That these evil effects of
Protestantism were not merely temporary--the accidental results of the
excitement and confusion which are peculiar to a stage of transition
(although they were no doubt intensified thereby)--is shown from
present-day statistics. The condition of domestic morality is usually
best indicated by the statistics of divorce, and of illegitimate births,
and by the proportion of legitimate children to the number of
marriages; while statistics of general criminality, where they can be
had, would convey a fair idea of the individual and public morality in
any given place. According to these tests Protestant countries are at
the present day much inferior to Catholic countries in domestic and
public morality. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., The Framework of a Christian State, first published in 1932, republished by Roman Catholic Books, pp. 102-104.)
Protestantism is false. It is from the devil. It can never serve as the
means of the salvation of anyone's immortal soul. It can never serve as
the foundation of social order. Although it is true that social disorder
occurred throughout the history of Christendom as men sinned and
suffered the consequences both personally and socially of their own
rebellion against God by means of those sins, it is also true that Holy
Mother Church stood as a beacon to help her wayward children to amend
Similarly, of course, many of the bishops who attended the "Second" Vatican Council did not intend to unleash the doctrinal and liturgical revolutionaries that had been planned for decades by the Modernists who prepared the schemata that was actually used at that false council. Some of these bishops were bewildered by the contradictions between what Holy Mother Church had taught from time immemorial and what was being proposed at the false council, although most of these bishops signed each and every document and went home to serve as quite willing dupes in the destruction of the Catholic Faith that followed, a destruction that they did not intend and that some of them who survive until now will never admit has been caused by the council and its defections from the true Faith. (See Revolutions Have Consequences, part one and Revolutions Have Consequences, part two.)
It is also the case at the present time that many of those protesting in one Mohammedan country after another in North Africa (Morocco, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria and Egypt) in the Persian Gulf (Bahrain, Qatar, Yemen, United Arab Emirates, Oman) and even, at least to a limited extent, in Jordan in the "Middle East" part of the Asian continent intend only to protest against repressive, authoritarian regimes and/or ruling families (see Gulf Monarchs Suddenly Nervous for a very good history of the ruling families of the Persian Gulf states). Most of them do not intend for there to be Mohammedan states patterned after the example of the Islamic Republic of Iran any more than those who joined the outset of the French Revolution believed that there could be Maximilian Robespierre's Reign of Terror that wound up taking off his own head.
Nevertheless, of course, just as the Jacobins in France and the Bolsheviks in Russia had their way in, respectively 1789 and 1917, so will it be the case that hard-core, "faithful" Mohammedans will have their way in the Mohammedan countries where "popular" protests have arisen in recent weeks. There can be no other outcome, which might very well serve to precipitate regional conflict with the State of Israel that would place the administration of Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus in a quite difficult position of balancing its effusive support for these protests--and its desire to pay obeisance to the false religion of Mohammedanism that shaped the early parts of the lives of caesar's father and stepfather--with the realities of campaign fundraising that are controlled in no small measure by wealthy American Jews intent on supporting the so-called "global war on terror" as a means of providing "security" to the State of Israel.
Mohammedanism is on the march. It is on the march even absent publicity stunts such as the one that has been announced by a Mohammedan "holy man" in the United Kingdom, Anjem Choudary, to hold a rally near the White House in Washington, District of Columbia, on Friday, March 4, 2011, to call for the imposition of Mohammedan law here in the United States of America (see Report: Radical Muslim Cleric Planning WH Protest). Mohammedanism is on the march in Europe as as indigenous Europeans have contracepted and aborted themselves onto the precipice of being minority members of the population of their own countries, each of which was once proudly Catholic and humbly submissive to the Social Reign of Christ the King as It was exercised by Holy Mother Church. And Mohammedanism is on the march in North Africa and the Persian Gulf States as determined Mohammedans seek to exploit the "popular" uprisings to position themselves for a power grab along the lines of Jacobins and Bolsheviks of the past.
Credit must be given to these determined Mohammedans for the zeal that they demonstrate in behalf of their false religion, which is, quite of course, from the devil and is deigned to sow the seeds of social chaos as souls are led into the flames of Hell. Zealous Mohammedans have more care and concern for their false religion that most Catholics, including many traditionally-minded Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, who care not one whit for the Social Reign of Christ the King, less yet to suffer openly for defending this Social Reign of Christ the King against its rejection and mockery by the false "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who embraces "religious liberty" and "separation of Church and State" that have been condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church repeatedly. To be silent in the face of the apostasy of the false religion of conciliarism gives impetus to all false religions in the world, especially when one considers that Ratzinger/Benedict believes in the blasphemous absurdity that "religion" can fight "irreligion" in the world.
On the contrary, my good and very few readers (some of whom aren't even, it appears, pleased with the shorter articles that they have been hectoring to receive for such a long time--smile, my friends, smile--all in good humor, you know), Catholics must have great zeal for the true Faith and great hatred for heresy. We cannot say that we love the true God of Divine Revelation and remain indifferent in the face of affronts to His Sacred Deposit of Faith. Consider these words of Father Frederick William Faber once again:
The love of God brings many new instincts into the
heart. Heavenly and noble as they are, they bear no resemblance to what
men would call the finer and more heroic developments of character. A
spiritual discernment is necessary to their right appreciation. They are
so unlike the growth of earth, that they must expect to meet on earth
with only suspicion, misunderstanding, and dislike. It is not easy to
defend them from a controversial point of view; for our controversy is
obliged to begin by begging the question, or else it would be unable so
much as to state its case. The axioms of the world pass current in the
world, the axioms of the gospel do not. Hence the world has its
own way. It talks us down. It tries us before tribunals where our
condemnation is secured beforehand. It appeals to principles which are
fundamental with most men but are heresies with us. Hence its audience
takes part with it against us. We are foreigners, and must pay the
penalty of being so. If we are misunderstood, we had no right to reckon
on any thing else, being as we are, out of our own country. We are made
to be laughed at. We shall be understood in heaven. Woe to those
easy-going Christians whom the world can understand, and will tolerate
because it sees they have a mind to compromise!
The love of souls is one of these instincts which the
love of Jesus brings into our hearts. To the world it is proselytism,
there mere wish to add to a faction, one of the selfish developments of
party spirit. One while the stain of lax morality is affixed to it,
another while the reproach of pharisaic strictness! For what the world
seems to suspect least of all in religion is consistency. But the love
of souls, however apostolic, is always subordinate to love of Jesus. We
love souls because of Jesus, not Jesus because of souls. Thus there are
times and places when we pass from the instinct of divine love to
another, from the love of souls to the hatred of heresy. This
last is particularly offensive to the world. So especially opposed is it
to the spirit of the world, that, even in good, believing hearts, every
remnant of worldliness rises in arms against this hatred of heresy,
embittering the very gentlest of characters and spoiling many a glorious
work of grace. Many a convert, in whose soul God would have done grand
things, goes to his grave a spiritual failure, because he would not hate
heresy. The heart which feels the slightest suspicion against the
hatred of heresy is not yet converted. God is far from reigning over it
yet with an undivided sovereignty. The paths of higher
sanctity are absolutely barred against it. In the judgment of the world,
and of worldly Christians, this hatred of heresy is exaggerated,
bitter, contrary to moderation, indiscreet, unreasonable, aiming at too
much, bigoted, intolerant, narrow, stupid, and immoral. What can we say
to defend it? Nothing which they can understand. We had, therefore,
better hold our peace. If we understand God, and He understands us, it
is not so very hard to go through life suspected, misunderstood and
unpopular. The mild self-opinionatedness of the gentle,
undiscerning good will also take the world's view and condemn us; for
there is a meek-loving positiveness about timid goodness which is far
from God, and the instincts of whose charity is more toward those who
are less for God, while its timidity is searing enough for harsh
judgment. There are conversions where three-quarters of the heart stop
outside the Church and only a quarter enters, and heresy can only be
hated by an undivided heart. But if it is hard, it has to be borne. A
man can hardly have the full use of his senses who is bent on proving
to the world, God's enemy, that a thorough-going Catholic hatred of
heresy is a right frame of man. We might as well force a blind man to
judge a question of color. Divine love inspheres in us a different
circle of life, motive, and principle, which is not only not that of the
world, but in direct enmity with it. From a worldly point of view, the
craters in the moon are more explicable things than we Christians with
our supernatural instincts. From the hatred of heresy we get to another
of these instincts, the horror of sacrilege. The distress caused by profane words seems to the world but an exaggerated sentimentality.
The penitential spirit of reparation which pervades the whole Church
is, on its view, either a superstition or an unreality. The perfect
misery which an unhallowed touch of the Blessed Sacrament causes to the
servants of God provokes either the world's anger or its derision. Men
consider it either altogether absurd in itself, or at any rate out of
all proportion; and, if otherwise they have proofs of our common sense,
they are inclined to put down our unhappiness to sheer hypocrisy. The
very fact that they do not believe as we believe removes us still
further beyond the reach even of their charitable comprehension. If they
do not believe in the very existence our sacred things, how they shall
they judge the excesses of a soul to which these sacred things are far
dearer than itself?
Now, it is important to bear all this in mind while
we are considering the sixth dolor. Mary's heart was furnished, as never
heart of saint was yet, yet with these three instincts regarding souls,
heresy, and sacrilege. They were in her heart three grand abysses of
grace, out of which arose perpetually new capabilities of suffering.
Ordinarily speaking, the Passion tires us. It is a fatiguing devotion.
It is necessarily so because of the strain of soul which it is every
moment eliciting. So when our Lord dies a feeling of repose comes over
us. For a moment we are tempted to think that our Lady's dolors ought to
have ended there, and that the sixth dolor and the seventh are almost
of our own creation, and that we tax our imagination in order to fill up
the picture with the requisite dark shading of sorrow. But this is only
one of the ways in which devotion to the dolors heightens and deepens
our devotion to the Passion. It is not our imagination that we tax but
our spiritual discernment. In these two last dolors we are led into
greater refinements of woe, into the more abstruse delicacies of grief,
because we have got to deal with a soul rendered even more wonderful
than it was before by the elevations of the sorrows which have gone
before. Thus, the piercing of our Lord with the spear as to our Blessed
Lady by far the most awful sacrilege which it was then in man's power to
perpetrate upon the earth. To break violently into the Holy of Holies
in the temple, and pollute its dread sanctity with all manner of heathen
defilement, would have been as nothing compared to the outrage of the
adorable Body of God. It is in vain that we try to lift ourselves to a
true appreciation of this horror in Mary's heart. Our love of God is
wanting in keenness, our perceptions of divine things in fineness. We
cannot do more than make approaches and they are terrible enough.
(Father Frederick Faber, The Foot of the Cross, published originally in England in 1857 under the title of The Dolors of Mary, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 291-295.)
We must be zealous in defense of the true religion, Catholicism, which is the one and only means of personal salvation and social order. The path to the peace of Christ the King runs through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. She told us so in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, nearly ninety-four years ago now. The Fatima Message is more relevant today than ever before. We must take this message seriously in our own lives.
Pray your Rosaries. Keep making sacrifices to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Remember that that Immaculate Heart of Mary will indeed triumph in the end. We need her abiding help to remain in a state of Sanctifying Grace at all times, understanding that we have nothing to fear from the forces of this passing world. We have to fear only one thing: dying in a state of final impenitence! May our zeal for the true Faith and our willingness to suffer for It help to cancel out a few of the debts that we owe to God for our sins as we entrust all to Him through that same Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints