Y2K's "Lesser Evil" Has Brought Us Great Evils

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Although the madness of this current election cycle ends six weeks from today as it is replaced almost immediately with the madness of the 2012 election cycle (either Hillary-mania or Sarah-mania, depending upon the outcome of the current madness in forty-two days), no one who is the least bit honest, sane or rational can contend that the so-called "lesser of two evils" in Y2K, the year 2000, then Texas Governor George Walker Bush, has not given us great evils.

Many of these evils were chronicled in the pages of the formerly printed journal Christ or Chaos and in various Catholic periodicals and websites before this particular website was able to publish direct political commentaries in 2006 following the voluntary divesting of our tax-exempt status. Countless articles have been written on this site since the middle of 2006 detailing the evils that have been advanced by the "lesser of the two evils" Bush administration, including an increase in statism that could never have been accomplished as seamlessly and with the support of so many "useful idiots" amongst "conservatives" if it had been attempted by a Democrat Party administration.

The myth that George Walker Bush is "pro-life" and that his administration has advanced the cause of the "inviolability" of the innocent preborn is apparent to anyone with a modicum of rationality. Chuck Baldwin, who is the Constitution Party's presidential candidate this year--and who would make a very fine Catholic if anyone sought to exhort him to quit Protestantism in order to embrace the fullness of the true Faith, wrote the following on March 10, 2005, citing some excellent sources in the process:

It is time to ask some hard questions about the preponderance of leaders and organizations commonly identified as the Religious Right. Are they gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant? How can anyone who truly believes that unborn babies deserve the right to life continue to support President George W. Bush? His track record on the life issue screams betrayal! Let's get real: on the subject of protecting the lives of unborn babies, Bush is just so much hot air!

American Life League president Judy Brown, columnist Thomas Droleskey, Howard Phillips, CovenantNews.com web host Jim Rudd, and many others have provided the American people with incontrovertible documentation regarding G.W. Bush's dismally pathetic record on the life issue. They have chronicled facts including:

Practically everyone in Bush's cabinet is pro-abortion. Bush is the first president to authorize stem cell research. In fact, his appointee to directorship of the National Institute of Health, Dr. Elias Zerhouni, is a pioneer in embryonic stem cell research. President Bush even blocked a vote on a congressional amendment that would have banned the patenting of human embryos.

President Bush has done nothing to remove abortifacients such as RU-486 from the shelves. He even supported the National Organization of Women (NOW) in their racketeering suit against Joe Scheidler and other pro-life advocates.

President Bush has approved millions of taxpayer dollars in funding for Planned Parenthood. He has authorized federal funding for abortion providers overseas to levels even higher than those authorized by President Bill Clinton!

Speaking of overseas funding for abortion, President Bush's $15 billion AIDS package provides payments to organizations that provide abortions including the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

President Bush even admitted his opposition to overturning Roe v Wade by stating emphatically, "there will be abortions. That's a reality." Of course, the President's wife Laura has also publicly said she is opposed to overturning Roe v Wade.

President Bush has repeatedly said that he has no litmus test on the life issue when it comes to appointing federal judges. Why does the Religious Right claim he intends to do something he has plainly and repeatedly denied? Again, are they gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant?

Beyond that, how far will the Religious Right go in their compromise and surrender of the life issue? Indications are there is practically no limit to their sellout.

We are already hearing leaders within the Religious Right say they will support the Republican presidential nominee in 2008 even if that nominee is openly pro-abortion. Such talk is obviously an attempt to begin calming potential concerns among pro-life conservatives if and when the Republican Party nominates a pro- abortion presidential candidate, which appears very likely to happen.

For example, a recent national gathering of Republicans voted Rudy Giuliani and Condi Rice as the top two choices to lead the GOP ticket in 2008. Of course, both Giuliani and Rice are pro- abortion. It will be more than interesting to listen to leaders of the Religious Right postulate on how a pro-abortion Democrat is evil but a pro- abortion Republican is righteous! Again, is the Religious Right gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant?

Perhaps disgusting is a more appropriate word to describe the behavior of the Religious Right. In order to keep its most favored special interest group status, it has compromised and capitulated just about every cardinal principle, including the life issue.

As a result, Republican presidents and congresses will continue to come and go, the Religious Right will continue to bask in the warm glow of Republican acceptance, and millions of pre-born babies will continue to have their little bodies torn apart by the abortionist's scalpel.

Do not fear, however. At least a Democrat is not in the White House. Obviously, that matters little to the more than 4 million unborn babies who have been slaughtered in the wombs of their mothers since G.W. Bush became President. What does matter, of course, is that the Religious Right is happy to embrace the Republican presidential candidate, his or her commitment to the unborn notwithstanding.

Is the Religious Right gullible, naïve, or willingly ignorant? It really doesn't matter. Whatever the motive or whatever the cause, the Religious Right has ceased to be a credible proponent of protecting the lives of unborn children, which leads to the greater question: who will pick up the mantle as the voice for the unborn? (Is The Religious Right Gullible, Naïve, or Willingly Ignorant?.)

 

Admitting that Mr. Baldwin does not realize that we have chemical and surgical baby-killing--and many other evils, including statism--under cover of law as a direct result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen wrought by the Protestant Revolt and cemented in place by Judeo-Masonry and the various social revolutions and naturalistic political ideologies and "philosophies," he did recognize that it is indeed patently absurd that the naturalist, Judeo-Masonic Republican Party is "pro-life" when it advances one evil after another under cover of law. Although I have withdrawn from all involvement in partisan politics and recognize that my previous support for the Constitution Party, which has a Calvinist view of government and law, was mistaken, Chuck Baldwin's commitment to honesty about the particulars of our political situation is admirable. It simply needs to be informed by an acceptance of the true Faith and a commitment to articulating Its Social Teaching, which is the only foundation of social order.

How sad it is that Catholics, of all people, continue to rush headlong into the madness of the naturalistic, Judeo-Masonic farce that is American electoral politics without seeking to learn any lessons from the past as they project into the skulls of a true intellectual reincarnation of the vacuous, mercurial thirty-third degree Mason named Robert Joseph Dole, Jr., John Sidney McCain III, and a self-professed feminist and support of contraception who would never "second guess" the Zionist State of Israel, Sarah Heath Palin, their own fondest hopes for the future as yet another Democrat Party bogeyman, Barack Hussein Obama, is presented to us as the "worst threat ever" to our legitimate liberties and to the cause of "limited government" and to the restoration of legal protection for the innocent preborn. (Yes, once again, that was but one sentence.)

Columnist George Will, who is no friend of the Social Reign of Christ the King, did nevertheless have a very prescient observation in a recent column about the wishful thinking that so many "conservatives" are exhibiting with respect to John Sidney McCain III:

 

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former Gov. Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either. (McCain's Queen of Hearts Intervention.)

Alas, what is happening at present is nothing new. It happens every four years. 

This is what I wrote in the very first issue of the printed journal Christ or Chaos in August of 1996:

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for his shameless attempt to appease both sides of the abortion issue, relegating us to little more than observers who must go along for the ride in his quest to win.

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for his support of the so-called hard cases exceptions. We have zero tolerance for those who contend, as a matter of principle, that there are conditions justifying the direct, intentional killing of innocent human beings.

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for his support of fetal experimentation and Planned Parenthood.

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for a political party which is maneuvering to put pro-aborts in key positions as the Vice Presidency. [2008 note: Dole played the same game in 1996 that McCain played this year, saying he would be "open" to a "pro-choice" running mate. Dole chose his fellow thirty-third degree Mason, Jack Kemp, a partly pro-life, partly pro-abortion former United States Representative from Buffalo, New York, and Secretary of Labor in the George Herbert Walker Bush administration, who rarely spoke about the issue at all except in front of "safe" Catholic audience.]

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for his brand of political bossism and the silence of those opponents deemed to be politically incorrect [namely, Patrick Joseph Buchanan]. . . .

It is time to tell Bob Dole zero tolerance for anyone who believes that the promotion of sinful lifestyles must be tolerated for the sake of "diversity".

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for his attitude that "you can be pro-choice or pro-life and still very be a very good Republican."

It is time to tell Bob Dole that we have zero tolerance for a Republican Party that recognizes the "pro-choice" position as a morally legitimate position. ("Zero Tolerance for Bob Dole, Christ or Chaos, Volume 1, Number 1, August, 1996. p. 3.)

 

Once again, my friends, no one who supports a single, solitary abortion under cover of law is pro-life. Such a person is simply less pro-abortion than those who support unrestricted access to abortion at all times under cover of law. It does violence to language and to logic to term anyone as "pro-life" who believes that any innocent baby may be executed licitly under the cover of civil law.

Dr. Charles E. Rice, writing in the August 27, 1998, issue of The Wanderer, put the matter this way as I was opposing then United States Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato's bid for renomination by the Right to Life Party of the State of New York:

Sen. D'Amato will face a pro-abortion Democratic opponent in the fall. While a voter could morally vote for a pro-abortion candidate who is less objectionable on abortion than his opponent, he should not. The tactic of voting for the less objectionable of two pro-abortion candidates is a tactic of incremental surrender. The incremental strategy of accepting the legalization of abortion in some cases concedes that some innocent human life is negotiable after all. The pro-death movement is a guaranteed winner against an opposition that qualifies its own position by conceding that there are some innocent human beings whom it will allow to be directly and intentionally killed. That approach in practice has mortgaged the pro-life effort to the interests and judgment of what Paul Johnson called "the great human scourge of the 20th century, the professional politician." (Modern Times, 1985, p. 510.)

When a politician says he favors legalized abortion in life of the mother, rape and incest, or other cases, he affirms the nonpersonhood of the unborn child by proposing that he be subjected to execution at the discretion of another. The politician's pro-life rhetoric will be drowned out by the loud and clear message of his position, that he concedes that the law can validly tolerate the intentional killing of innocent human beings. Apart from exceptions, of course, Sen. D'Amato is objectionable as well for some of his other stands on abortion and for his positions on other issues, including especially the homosexual issue.

Pro-lifers could increase their political impact if they were single-issue voters, treating abortion as an absolutely disqualifying issue. Any candidate who believes that the law should treat any innocent human beings as nonpersons by tolerating their execution is unworthy to hold any public office, whether President, trustee of a mosquito abatement district, or senator. (Dr. Charles E. Rice, "Pro-Life Reflections on Sen. D'Amato, The Wanderer, August 27, 1998.)

 

Although I have come to the noninfallible, prudential judgment that participation in our fraudulent system of of Judeo-Masonic electoral politics serves no rational good, a position which is not outside of the pale of Catholic thought (see: Reference Resource: The Fraud of Voting), Dr. Rice's analysis ten years ago should serve to give some of those who refuse to learn the lessons of the past and/or who continue to project, without any rational foundation whatsoever, their fondest hopes and desires into the skulls of John Sidney McCain III and Sarah Heath Palin while they support an ever increasing amount of statist measures some pause for reflection and reconsideration.

"Things" are no different now than they were with Bob Dole, part one, twelve years ago, save for the fact that chemical and surgical child-killing under cover of law has been more institutionalized and the fact that the unjust power, size and scope of the Federal government of the United States of American has increased exponentially under the "compassionate conservative," President George Walker Bush, Y2K's "lesser of two evils," the man whose "pro-life" administration permitted the over-the-counter sale of the Plan B "emergency" contraceptive and whose first appointee to the Supreme Court of the United States of America, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, did nothing to intervene to save the life of a preborn child in the State of Missouri in 2005 when his mother, a prisoner of the State of Missouri, desired to kill him:

“The inmate, identified in court papers only as Jane Roe, was pregnant when she was sent to a women's prison in Vandalia, Mo., on a parole violation and had been trying for seven weeks to obtain an abortion. She is now 17 weeks pregnant. She plans to pay for the procedure herself but, as an inmate, needs the prison to arrange transportation to a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Louis, 80 miles away.

“Under a policy it adopted last year, the Missouri Department of Corrections will not transport inmates for abortions that it deems not medically necessary. Last Thursday, after the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on the inmate's behalf, Judge H. Dean Whipple of Federal District Court in Kansas City ordered the state to provide access to the abortion. The inmate would otherwise ‘suffer irreparable harm,’ he said.

“The state then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in St. Louis, which refused to grant a stay of Judge Whipple's order. The state next turned to Justice Thomas, who has administrative jurisdiction over the Eighth Circuit.

“In the appeal, Crawford v. Roe, No. 05A333, Attorney General Jay Nixon acknowledged that a state could not impose an ‘undue burden’ on the right to abortion. But in this case, he said, ‘it is not the prison that has imposed the burden, but the prisoner's violation of the law that resulted in her incarceration that has imposed the burden.’ The inmate was jailed for a parole violation.

“Justice Thomas gave no reason for granting the stay on Friday night, and the full court, to which he then referred the case, gave no reason for vacating the stay. Neither he nor any other member of the court indicated a dissent from the order the court issued on Monday.”

“Neither he nor any other member of the court indicated a dissent from the order issued on Monday.” (The New York Times, October 18, 2005.)

 

In other words, every single member of the Supreme Court of the United States, including its four Catholic members at the time--Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, and Anthony Kennedy--consented in consigning the preborn child of the Missouri prisoner to death in a baby-killing mill. After all, the “law is the law,” right? No, human law that defies the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law is no law at all. Those who are the prisoners of the written words of a Constitution that does not admit of any higher law are thus rendered unable to even think and to act as Catholics and to act to save a life that is being threatened as a result of a court’s previous unjust decisions. So much for the "court," my friends. So much for the "court."

Is any sleepy-eyed "conservative" or other wishful thinker going to contend that John Sidney McCain III or Sarah Heath Palin or the "constitutionalist" members of the Supreme Court of the United States of America is going to undo a law that was signed by President George Walker Bush, Y2K's "lesser evil," in the year 2004 that authorized the State Department of the United States of America to conduct an annual "anti-Semitism" review. Mr. Hugh Akins, an indefatigable apostle of the Social Reign of Christ the King, summarized some of the details of this "review act" in an e-mail he sent out recently:

In October of 2004, President Bush signed into law the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act, another dangerous, totalitarian measure, the main thrust of which was the creation of a special office within the State Department assigned with the task of monitoring anti-Semitism throughout the world.

Appointed to head the office is a man by the name of Gregg Rickman, another neocon Washington Insider.  A former Senate staff director and chairman of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Rickman had also played a major role in shaking down $2 billion from certain Swiss banks in the late 1990s.  A committed Zionist, as all neocons and their liberal counterparts are, working tirelessly against America’s best interests in order to serve the cause of International Jewry, as neocons and their Zionist masters always do, Rickman’s State Department office of global anti-Semitism issued two reports which establish the criteria for what constitutes an act of anti-Semitism according to federal guidelines.  The list is quite disturbing inasmuch as it is blatantly subversive and tyrannical, not to mention, specifically, repressive of Christianity and therefore a particularly deadly form of religious persecution to come. 

Let us take a closer look.  In the letter and spirit of these two official State Department documents, anti-Semitism is, or is likely to be defined as: 

• ·         Any references to the Jews being responsible for the Crucifixion of Christ, which includes the divinely inspired Sacred Scriptures as well as the traditional Good Friday liturgy;
• ·         Any criticism of Israel or its leaders, no matter how vile and numerous the atrocities, war crimes, acts of inhumanity or acts of sheer hatred they’ve systematically committed;
• ·         Any denunciation of Judaism or its teachings or institutions, such as the Talmud and Kabbalah;
• ·         Any affirmation of the fact that Jews control the White House and the Congress, the mass media and the film industry, international business and world finance;
• ·         Any suggestion that U.S. foreign or domestic policies are controlled, manipulated or greatly influenced by the Jewish Power (AIPAC, for example – The American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee);
• ·         Any assertion that a Jewish-Zionist plot was behind 9/11, or is behind the War on Terror, or the emerging American Police State, or Globalism, or World Government, or the dawning New World Order;
• ·         Any hint of calling into question the gigantic hoax of the “six million,” a figure so utterly exaggerated that even a growing number of Jewish scholars have disparaged it;
• ·         Any talk of Israel being a racist or a terrorist state, or part of a vast criminal Zionist Conspiracy;
• ·         Any mention of Bolshevism, Communism, predator capitalism or Satanic Freemasonry being a Jewish-Zionist creation or orchestration …

That’s quite a list even if an incomplete one, the essence of which would be sufficient to prove the very existence of the supremacist sophistry and diabolic designs the Jews and their political harlots in the American government and media would cover-up by crushing any and all potential resistance to it.  Here, in this joint Synagogue-State Department initiative to discredit, silence and ultimately obliterate the opposition, is the most effective means by which the Talmudic masterminds intend to criminalize Catholic faith, Catholic worship, and the Catholic worldview and world apostolate, especially that most holy and merciful apostolate aimed at the conversion of the Jews as well as the reestablishment, over every people and nation, of the Sovereign Reign of Jesus Christ our King.   

E. Michael Jones comments: “The State Department criteria has serious implications for anyone alive today.  The most serious is that it turns  many Jews, who have made many of the above claims in books and articles they have written, into anti-Semites.  But the State Department’s definitions have serious historical implications as well … [I]t seems clear that not just ordinary Catholics but Catholic popes and saints were guilty of anti-Semitism, according to the State Department’s criteria.  Numerous popes beginning with Gregory IX in 1238 have condemned the Talmud as a blasphemous assault on the person of Christ and the Christian faith and have urged Christians to confiscate and burn it … St. Peter, the first pope, claimed in the Acts of the Apostles that the Jews were responsible for the death of Christ.  By their promiscuous use of the term anti-Semitism, Rickman and his cohorts in the State Department have turned traditional Catholic teaching into a hate crime (“The Conversion of the Revolutionary Jew,” Culture Wars, October, 2006).  (Please see Mr. Akins's Catholic Action Resource Center for information on his next book, Synagogue Rising.)

 

John Sidney McCain III and Sarah Heath Palin are going to reverse this? Sure, just like they're going to reverse the decision of the Food and Drug Administration eight years ago this month to market the human pesticide, RU-486, and just like they're going to reverse Federal funding for embryonic research, and just like they're going to reverse Federal funding for domestic and international "family planning" programs, and just like they're going to reverse the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Bill, and just like they're going to reverse the Plan B "emergency" abortifacient. Sure. Mister Tooth Fairy, come to the phone, please, there is a call waiting for you from millions of blind and ignorant people who never pay any attention to facts and who convince themselves election year after election year that "things" are going to be "different" this time around once and for all.

It's kind of the same phenomenon as afflicts those who believe that "things" will get better in the counterfeit church of conciliarism despite the fact that it is headed by revolutionaries who believe in things offensive to God and injurious to souls. This fantastic (as in fantasy) way of viewing the world results in delusion during each election cycle and it will result in continued "hope" in each successive conference held on the anniversaries of the issuance and implementation of Summorum Pontificum. Systems premised on falsehoods will never get "better."

Those who are believed to be the "lesser" of two evils are actually better equipped to advance the agenda of evil than those who are open and honest about their commitment to the promotion of various evils under cover of law. "Conservatives" who have convinced themselves that they have "beaten back" another Democrat Party bogeyman go to sleep for four or eight years and actually get outraged when someone points out the simple facts that their "heroes" have done things to promote various evils under cover of law that they would never have tolerated for a moment if a naturalist of the Democrat Party had done so.

I mean, really, folks, even though some Republicans in both Houses of the United States Congress are indeed raising serious questions about the current Bush administration's proposed $700 billion bail out of various financial institutions (see: Bailout Plan a Hard Sell on Capitol Hill), could you imagine the howlings of accusations that socialism, if not Bolshevism itself, was being instituted by such a scheme  if it it had been suggested by a Democrat Party administration instead of a "pro-life" administration? A power grab is under way by the Bush administration that is going to cost taxpayers for generations to come. How can any sane human being claim that there is any difference between the false opposites of the naturalist "left" and the naturalist "right."

Then again, how many even traditionally-minded Catholics understand that inexorable rise of the power of the civil state is a direct consequence of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King, and that it is only the restoration of what Pope Saint Pius X called the "Catholic City" that is going to curb the unjust power grab that the civil state has been engaged in for most of the past five hundred years?

A civil state that recognizes no authority above itself to safeguard the eternal good of the souls of its citizens and thus to serve a check upon its own abuse of power that serves as a threat to the eternal good of its citizens' souls will become a "church" unto itself from which no one can dissent legitimately lest he be accused of being "unpatriotic."

A civil state that does not advance the eternal good of the souls of its citizens--and indeed is a threat to that eternal good by sanctioning various evils under cover of law as these same evils are further institutionalized in every aspect of popular culture--becomes a monster with a voracious appetite for more and more power as legitimate human liberties are restricted and as its confiscatory taxing powers are expanded to fund needless, unjust wars and to bail out corporate tycoons whose speculative ventures to make more and more money have come a cropper. This only gets worse and worse with time. No naturalistic force on earth is going to be retard this growth of civil power. Only the conversion of men to the true Faith and nations to the Social Reign of Christ the King can do so.

Father Denis Fahey pointed this out in The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World:

he tide of revolt which broke away from the Catholic Church had the immediate effect of increasing the power of princes and rulers in Protestant countries. The Anabaptists and the peasants in Germany protested in the name of ‘evangelical liberty,’ but they were crushed. We behold the uprise of national churches, each of which organizes its own particular form of religion, mixture of supernatural and natural elements, as a department of State. The orthodox Church in Russia was also a department of State and as such exposed to the same evils. National life was thus withdrawn from ordered subjection to the Divine Plan and the distinction laid down by our Divine Lord Himself, between the things that are God’s and the things that are Caesar’s, utterly abolished. Given the principle of private judgment or of individual relation with Christ, it was inevitable that the right of every individual to arrange his own form of religion should cause the pendulum to swing from a Caesarinism supreme in Church and State to other concrete expressions of ‘evangelical liberty.’ One current leads to the direction of indefinite multiplication of sects. Pushed to its ultimate conclusion, this would, this would give rise to as many churches as there are individuals, that is, there would not be any church at all. As this is too opposed to man’s social nature, small groups tend to coalesce. The second current tends to the creation of what may be termed broad or multitudinist churches. The exigencies of the national churches are attenuated until they are no longer a burden to anybody. The Church of England is an example of this. As decay in the belief of the Divinity of Jesus continues to increase, the tendency will be to model church organization according to the political theories in favour at the moment. The democratic form of society will be extolled and a ‘Reunion of Christendom,’ for example, will be aimed at, along the a lines of the League of Nations. An increasing number of poor bewildered units will, of course, cease to bother about any ecclesiastical organization at all.

The first [political] result was an enormous increase in the power of the Temporal Rulers, in fact a rebirth of the pagan regime of Imperial Rome. The Spiritual Kingship of Christ, participated in by the Pope and the Bishops of the Catholic Church being no longer acknowledged, authority over spiritual affairs passed to Temporal Rulers. They were thus, in Protestant countries, supposed to share not only in His Temporal Kingship of Christ the King, but also in His spiritual Kingship. As there was no Infallible Guardian of order above the Temporal Rulers, the way was paved for the abuses of State Absolutism. The Protestant oligarchy who ruled England with undisputed sway, from Charles the Second’s time on, and who treated Ireland to the Penal Laws, may be cited, along with that cynical scoundrel, Frederick of Prussia, as typical examples of such rulers. Catholic monarchs, like Louis XIV of France and Joseph II of Austria, by their absolutist tendencies and pretensions to govern the Catholic Church show the influence of the neighboring Protestant countries. Gallicanism and Josephism are merely a revival of Roman paganism.

The rejection by Luther of the visible Catholic Church opened the door, not only to the abuses of absolute rulers, supreme in Church and State, but soon led to an indifference to all ecclesiastical organizations. As faith in the supernatural life of grace and the supernatural order grew dim and waned, the way was made smooth for the acceptance of Freemasonry. The widespread loss of faith in the existence of the supernatural life and the growing ignorance of the meaning of the Redemption permitted the apostles of Illuminism and Masonry to propagate the idea that the true religion of Jesus Christ had never been understood or been corrupted by His disciples, especially by the Church of Rome, the fact being that only a few sages in secret societies down the centuries had kept alive the true teaching of Jesus Christ. According to this ‘authentic’ teaching our Saviour had established a new religion, but had simply restored the religion of the state of nature, the religion of the goodness of human nature when left to itself, freed from the bonds and shackles of society. Jesus Christ died a martyr for liberty, put to death by the rulers and priests. Masons and revolutionary secret societies alone are working for the true salvation of the world. By them shall original sin be done away with and the Garden of Eden restored. But the present organization of society must disappear, by the elimination of the tyranny of priests, the despotism of princes and the slavery resulting from national distinctions, from family life and from private property.

 

Father Fahey pointed out that the the Lutheran notion of the "separation of Church and State," a falsehood embraced by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his counterfeit church of conciliarism, led to the abuses of Calvinist capitalism against the poor as  much of the foundation for contemporary "wealth": was established by the confiscation of the Church's property by the civil state and its redistribution to the elite who supported the Protestant Revolt against the Divine Plan that God had instituted to effect man's return to Him through His Catholic Church. This, in turn, led the opposite extreme, Judeo-Masonic Communism (oops, did I violate Bush's State Department review act?):

The rending of the Mystical Body by the so-called Reformation movement has resulted in the pendulum swinging from the extreme error of Judaeo-Protestant Capitalism to the opposite extreme error of the Judaeo-Masonic-Communism of Karl Marx.

The uprise of individualism rapidly led to unbridled self-seeking. Law-makers who were arbiters of morality, as heads of the Churches, did not hesitate to favour their own enterprising spirit. The nobles and rich merchants in England, for example, who got possession of the monastery lands, which had maintained the poor, voted the poor laws in order to make the poor a charge on the nation at large. The enclosure of common lands in England and the development of the industrial system are a proof of what private judgment can do when transplanted into the realm of production and distribution. The Lutheran separation of Church from the Ruler and the Citizen shows the decay in the true idea of membership of our Lord's Mystical Body.

"Assuredly," said Luther, "a prince can be a Christian, but it is not as a Christian that he ought to govern. As a ruler, he is not called a Christian, but a prince. The man is Christian, but his function does not concern his religion."

 

Dr. George O'Brien made the same essential points in An Essay on the Economic Efforts of the Reformation (IHS Press, Norfolk, Virginia, 2003):

The thesis we have endeavoured to present in this essay is, that the two great dominating schools of modern economic thought have a common origin. The capitalist school, which, basing its position on the unfettered right of the individual to do what he will with his own, demands the restriction of government interference in economic and social affairs within the narrowest  possible limits, and the socialist school, which, basing its position on the complete subordination of the individual to society, demands the socialization of all the means of production, if not all of wealth, face each other today as the only two solutions of the social question; they are bitterly hostile towards each other, and mutually intolerant and each is at the same weakened and provoked by the other. In one respect, and in one respect only, are they identical--they can both be shown to be the result of the Protestant Reformation.

We have seen the direct connection which exists between these modern schools of economic thought and their common ancestor. Capitalism found its roots in the intensely individualistic spirit of Protestantism, in the spread of anti-authoritative ideas from the realm of religion into the realm of political and social thought, and, above all, in the distinctive Calvinist doctrine of a successful and prosperous career being the outward and visible sign by which the regenerated might be known. Socialism, on the other hand, derived encouragement from the violations of established and prescriptive rights of which the Reformation afforded so many examples, from the growth of heretical sects tainted with Communism, and from the overthrow of the orthodox doctrine on original sin, which opened the way to the idea of the perfectibility of man through institutions. But, apart from these direct influences, there were others, indirect, but equally important. Both these great schools of economic thought are characterized by exaggerations and excesses; the one lays too great stress on the importance of the individual, and other on the importance of the community; they are both departures, in opposite directions, from the correct mean of reconciliation and of individual liberty with social solidarity. These excesses and exaggerations are the result of the free play of private judgment unguided by authority, and could not have occurred if Europe had continued to recognize an infallible central authority in ethical affairs.

The science of economics is the science of men's relations with one another in the domain of acquiring and disposing of wealth, and is, therefore, like political science in another sphere, a branch of the science of ethics. In the Middle Ages, man's ethical conduct, like his religious conduct, was under the supervision and guidance of a single authority, which claimed at the same time the right to define and to enforce its teaching. The machinery for enforcing the observance of medieval ethical teaching was of a singularly effective kind; pressure was brought to bear upon the conscience of the individual through the medium of compulsory periodical consultations with a trained moral adviser, who was empowered to enforce obedience to his advice by the most potent spiritual sanctions. In this way, the whole conduct of man in relation to his neighbours was placed under the immediate guidance of the universally received ethical preceptor, and a common standard of action was ensured throughout the Christian world in the all the affairs of life. All economic transactions in particular were subject to the jealous scrutiny of the individual's spiritual director; and such matters as sales, loans, and so on, were considered reprehensible and punishable if not conducted in accordance with the Christian standards of commutative justice.

The whole of this elaborate system for the preservation of justice in the affairs of everyday life was shattered by the Reformation. The right of private judgment, which had first been asserted in matters of faith, rapidly spread into moral matters, and the attack on the dogmatic infallibility of the Church left Europe without an authority to which it could appeal on moral questions. The new Protestant churches were utterly unable to supply this want. The principle of private judgment on which they rested deprived them of any right to be listened to whenever they attempted to dictate moral precepts to their members, and henceforth the moral behaviour of the individual became a matter to be regulated by the promptings of his own conscience, or by such philosophical systems of ethics as he happened to approve. The secular state endeavoured to ensure that dishonesty amounting to actual theft or fraud should be kept in check, but this was a poor and ineffective substitute for the powerful weapon of the confessional. Authority having once broken down, it was but a single step from Protestantism to rationalism; and the way was opened to the development of all sorts of erroneous systems of morality.

 

Anyone who thinks that an election featuring a Communist-trained naturalist and a nincompoop naturalist who knows nothing about rational thought is going to change all of this is, pardon me, somehow not thinking clearly, to put it charitably.

Christ the King's champion Hugh Akins explained his own thoughts on the madness of the moment in an e-mail he sent to me earlier today (and, yes, indeed, my friends, specific and categorical permission was obtained by me from Mr. Akins to publish the following remarks; I will have another article soon on the due diligence we must follow before we publish the remarks of others):

Yes, it's tragic, not to mention scandalous on the part of Catholics who ought to know better, the way folks are falling all over themselves to make Palin into another Saint Joan. Hardly! It's disturbing how trad Catholics can so easily be deceived. Then again, what else is new!. . . .

You are so right - I have often and long argued the same thing - that the "lesser" of the two evils usually ends up the GREATER of the evils.  In driving us deeper into Satan's camp as a nation, the "lesser" Mr Bush (resident dictator and war criminal) has advanced the cause with far greater successes than the Kerrys and the Clintons and the Obamas ever could. The same will be the reality if McCain and "St. Joan" Palin are elected. They will drive us further into communism and WWIII and the Universal Satanic Republic faster and more efficiently than the Obama-Biden-Clinton team ever could. It never ceases to amaze me, too, how many intelligent people actually think the McCain team is really pro-life.  Pro-Planned Parenthood, pro-UN, pro-trade with Red China, pro-warmongering all over the globe - all these things make "Songbird Johnny" who betrayed his country and his fellow POWs in Vietnam not pro-life but pro-choice ... The man is clearly anti-life and pro-death!!! 

Ah yes, the lies that men tell!  The evil that men do!  But the truth shall prevail.  Satan reigns supreme for the moment, but Jesus and Mary shall have THEIR victory. Their kingdom come!!!!

 

Pope Leo XIII, writing in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900, and A Review of His Pontificate, put the matter as clearly as it can be stated:

A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. "If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he burneth" john xv., 6). "He that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime.

So great is this struggle of the passions and so serious the dangers involved, that we must either anticipate ultimate ruin or seek for an efficient remedy. It is of course both right and necessary to punish malefactors, to educate the masses, and by legislation to prevent crime in every possible way: but all this is by no means sufficient. The salvation of the nations must be looked for higher. A power greater than human must be called in to teach men's hearts, awaken in them the sense of duty, and make them better. This is the power which once before saved the world from destruction when groaning under much more terrible evils. Once remove all impediments and allow the Christian spirit to revive and grow strong in a nation, and that nation will be healed. The strife between the classes and the masses will die away; mutual rights will be respected. If Christ be listened to, both rich and poor will do their duty. The former will realise that they must observe justice and charity, the latter self-restraint and moderation, if both are to be saved. Domestic life will be firmly established ( by the salutary fear of God as the Lawgiver. In the same way the precepts of the natural law, which dictates respect for lawful authority and obedience to the laws, will exercise their influence over the people. Seditions and conspiracies will cease. Wherever Christianity rules over all without let or hindrance there the order established by Divine Providence is preserved, and both security and prosperity are the happy result. The common welfare, then, urgently demands a return to Him from whom we should never have gone astray; to Him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life,-and this on the part not only of individuals but of society as a whole. We must restore Christ to this His own rightful possession. All elements of the national life must be made to drink in the Life which proceedeth from Him- legislation, political institutions, education, marriage and family life, capital and labour. Everyone must see that the very growth of civilisation which is so ardently desired depends greatly upon this, since it is fed and grows not so much by material wealth and prosperity, as by the spiritual qualities of morality and virtue.  (Pope Leo XIII,

Tametsi Futura Prospicientus, November, 1, 1900.)

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which  it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

 

There is little hope, humanly speaking, of large numbers of people recognizing and accepting these basic truths in the midst of the insanity of the moment, especially as we are but three nights away from the first "joint appearance" of the two major naturalistic organized crime families' titular heads talking past each other with their various "talking points" (an enterprise that is laughingly called a "debate"). So be it. However, what we can do is present those who are open to looking at the truth of the world as it can be viewed through the eyes of the true Faith, trying to plant a few seeds as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to help more and more people to see that the world in which we live is constructed on one artifice after another, some of which are collapsing right before our very eyes.

Padre Pio of Pietrelcina, who died forty years ago today, on September 23, 1968, never made even one single compromise with evil. Neither should we. Indeed, we should pray to this great Capuchin friar, who battled with the devil very frequently, to help us to be uncompromising in our refusal to accept the lies of a political system founded upon a rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King and an exaltation of the lies of naturalism, religious indifferentism, and semi-Pelagianism. Padre Pio took no prisoners in defending the good of souls. We must be unstinting in our own efforts to drive out the influence of the devil in our own souls, especially by means of Eucharistic piety, our praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, and our making use of the Sacred Tribunal of Penance on a weekly basis, if at all possible, to equip us better to battle the devil in the world and to help expedite the day in which Our Lady's Fatima Message will be fulfilled and the Social Reign of Christ the King and of herself, Our Immaculate Queen.

Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Never forget this fact. Never be distracted by the sideshow that is the naturalistic farce of American electoral politics and the artifice of a national economy based on the unfettered greed of men who live only to have more of this world's goods and who recoil in horror when these words are spoken from the lips of anyone who dares to utter them:

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of Ransom, 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.

Pope Saint Linus, pray for us.

Saint Thecla, pray for us.

Padre Pio of Pietrelcina, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?