From 1776 to 2023: A Steady March from Religious Indifferentism to Totalitarianism

Merrick Garland, who is the Minister of Injustice for the United States of America, picked a discredited prosecutor, Jack Smith, to exact legal vengeance upon Donald John Trump, who has always been and will, barring a miracle of Our Lady’s graces for which we must pray daily, his own worst enemy without an ounce of self-reflection or any ability to distinguish the prudent from the imprudent, for the unforgiveable political crime of having defeated Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton for the Presidency of the United States of America on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Trump’s election interrupted what was supposed to have been a seamless continuation of the “transformative” policies of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro.

It is for the political crime of having won in 2016 that former President Donald John Trump has been pilloried for doing things that members of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist left have done and continue to do with perfect impunity, something that Dr. Victor Davis Hanson and Kimberly A. Straasel pointed out in different commentaries some detail three days after the latest indictment against Trump has handed down on Tuesday, August 1, 2023, the Feast of Saint Peter’s Chains and the Commemoration of the Holy Machabees. by a Federal grand jury of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia:

Two sets of laws now operate in an increasingly unrecognizable America.

Consider the matter of unlawfully removing and storing classified papers.

Donald Trump may go to prison for removing contested White House files to his home.

So far Joe Biden seems exempt from just such legal jeopardy.

But as a senator and Vice President with no right, as does a president, to declassify files, Biden removed and, as a private citizen kept for years classified files in unsecure locations.

Biden’s team strangely revealed the unlawful removals after years of silence.

It did so because the Biden administration found itself in the untenable position of prosecuting the former president for “crimes” that the current president committed as well—albeit far earlier and longer.

Impeachable phone calls?

Donald Trump was impeached by a Democratic House for delaying foreign aid until the Ukrainian government guaranteed that Hunter Biden and his family were no longer engaged in corrupt influence peddling in Kyiv.

In addition, the Left charged that Trump was targeting Joe Biden, his possible 2020 rival.

Yet Biden, with impunity, bragged that he had fired a Ukrainian prosecutor looking into his own son’s schemes by promising to cancel outright American foreign aid.

And the Biden administration’s Justice Department is now targeting Trump, currently the frontrunning challenger to Biden in 2024.

Election denialism?

Trump was indicted by Special Counsel Jack Smith, in part for supposedly conspiratorially “unlawfully discounting legitimate votes.”

Will Smith then also indict Stacey Abrams? For years Abrams falsely claimed that she was the real governor of Georgia. She toured the country in hopes of “discounting” the state vote count.

Or maybe Smith was referring to the conspiracist and former president Jimmy Carter.

He alleged that Trump in 2016 “lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.”

Will Smith charge Hillary Clinton?

She serially libeled Trump as an “illegitimate” president.

Clinton hatched the Russian collusion hoax, and bragged she joined the “Resistance” to continue her attacks on an elected president.

Or maybe Smith meant the Hollywood crowd.

Lots of actors cut commercials after the 2016 election—begging viewers to pressure the electors to ignore their constitutional duties to honor their states’ popular vote and instead swing their ballots to Hillary Clinton?

Was not that “insurrectionary?”

Or was Smith thinking of January 2005?

Then 32 Democratic House members and Sen. Barbara Boxer tried to nullify the legally certified vote in Ohio—to thereby elect the loser John Kerry.

How about destroying evidence?

Trump was also indicted for allegedly attempting to erase video material from his own cameras in his own house.

Yet Hillary Clinton with impunity eliminated subpoenaed communication devices and thousands of emails.

Violations of security? Trump was indicted for supposedly loosely talking about classified material to visitors at his home.

So will prosecutor Smith’s indictments also extend to Hillary Clinton? She sent classified documents illegally over her unsecure private server.

FBI Director James Comey memorialized a confidential president conversation.

Then he deliberately leaked what properly was a classified document to the media. It was all part of Comey’s Machiavellian gambit to prompt the appointment of a favorable special prosecutor.

What about subversion of the electoral process?

Donald Trump was indicted for supposedly undermining the election of 2020 by questioning the integrity of the balloting.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign illegally hired two foreign nationals Christopher Steele and Igor Danchenko to compile falsehoods about her opponent Trump.

Clinton hid her payments behind three paywalls.

Her team, along with the FBI, helped leak the counterfeit dossier to the media and high officials to undermine her opponent—and thus subvert the election itself.

Lying and perjury?

Two Trump aides and Trump himself are indicted for supposedly stonewalling federal investigators by claiming either amnesia or ignorance.

That tact is exactly what James Comey did 245 times while under oath before Congress.

What do former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former Director of the CIA John Brennan, and former interim FBI Director Andrew McCabe all have in common?

All three admitted they flagrantly lied either under oath to Congress or to federal investigators.

The three were never indicted for their false and perjurious testimonies.

We have now serially devolved from the 2016 election “Russian collusion” hoax, to the 2020 election “Russian disinformation” laptop hoax, and down to the 2024 election weaponized indictments.

Out of pathological hatred or fear of Donald Trump, the Left has crafted one set of laws for themselves, and another for all other Americans.

They smugly believe their own moral superiority grants them such a right to apply laws unequally—or to ignore them altogether.

To retain power at all cost, and to destroy a political rival, leftwing Democrats are systematically dismantling the constitutional foundations of the United States as we once knew them. (Two Sets of Laws for Two Americas. Also see: Durham reports shows Biden and Obama knew truth of Trump collusion hoax but kept silent and Biden, Obama Treasury and Energy Officials Dug Up Michael Flynn Info.)

If there’s one word to describe what everyone might wish Washington would stop producing, it’s “unprecedented.” Yet here we go again, with special counsel Jack Smith’s unprecedented indictment of a politician for engaging in “a conspiracy to defraud the United States.” Be prepared for this new and startlingly elastic precedent to ensnare plenty of others.

That’s the biggest problem with Mr. Smith’s latest broadside against Donald Trump, on top of its untested legal theories and evidence of a Justice Department double standard. As former Attorney General William Barr told CNN on Wednesday, “there were reasons not to bring” the case, and among them is “the slippery slope of criminalizing legitimate political activity.”

Take Mr. Trump out of the equation and consider more broadly what even the New York Times calls Mr. Smith’s “novel approach.” A politician can lie to the public, Mr. Smith concedes. Yet if that politician is advised by others that his comments are untruthful and nonetheless uses them to justify acts that undermine government “function,” he is guilty of a conspiracy to defraud the country. Dishonest politicians who act on dubious legal claims? There aren’t enough prisons to hold them all.

Consider how many politicians might already be doing time had prosecutors applied this standard earlier. Both Al Gore and George W. Bush filed lawsuits in the 2000 election that contained bold if untested legal claims. Surely both candidates had advisers who told them privately that they may have legitimately lost—and neither publicly conceded an inch until the Supreme Court resolved the matter. Might an ultimate sore winner have used this approach to indict the loser for attempting to thwart the democratic process?

And why limit the theory to election claims? In 2014 the justices held unanimously that President Barack Obama had violated the Constitution by decreeing that the Senate was in recess so that he could install several appointees without confirmation. It was an outrageous move, one that Mr. Obama’s legal counselors certainly warned was a loser, yet the White House vocally insisted the president had total “constitutional authority” to do it. Under Mr. Smith’s standard, that was a lie that Mr. Obama used to defraud the public by jerry-rigging the function of a labor board with illegal appointments.

What’s the betting someone told President Biden he didn’t have the power to erase $430 billion in student loan debt. Oh, wait! That’s right. He told himself. “I don’t think I have the authority to do it by signing with a pen,” he said in 2021. The House speaker advised him it was illegal: “People think that the president of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not,” Nancy Pelosi said. Yet Mr. Biden later adopted the lie that he did, and took action to defraud taxpayers by obstructing the federal function of loan processing—until the Supreme Court made him stop.

If even a former president can be hit with conspiracy charges, what’s to protect a mere congressman, or a failed candidate, or a consultant? For how long did Stacey Abrams falsely dispute her loss in the 2018 Georgia governor’s race and pressure Georgia lawmakers to alter election procedures in ways that might undermine voting integrity on the basis of untruths? Would the advisers who egged her on in that pursuit qualify as co-conspirators, like the lawyers in Mr. Smith’s indictment?

The press is rooting for the special counsel to go after Republican lawmakers who on the basis of Mr. Trump’s claims objected to slates of electors on Jan. 6, 2021. Let’s line them all up, including dozens of Democrats who objected to slates in 2001, 2005 and 2017—on the basis of lies and with the purpose of conspiring to obstruct (as the Smith indictment puts it) “the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified.”

We now know that Rep. Adam Schiff looked at a classified surveillance warrant application against a Trump adviser, lied about its contents publicly, memorialized those lies in an official memo, and used it to help gin up an investigation that definitely impeded the function of the Trump administration. We have evidence that the Federal Bureau of Investigation officials behind that application—James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok—used a dossier full of lies to get that warrant. Fortunately for them, special counsel John Durham chose not to take a flyer by indicting them for conspiracy.

Smith fans will say this is a special case, the “big” lie, a one-time necessity for justice. Yet once a bar is lowered, it will be lowered further. Remember when impeachments, special committees, the stripping of committee assignments, and contempt citations were rare? Of course future prosecutors will take this precedent and expand it in ever more novel ways.

There are any number of things as certain as death and taxes. One is that politicians will lie, and act on those untruths. Now that might make them felons. (The Unprecedented Jack Smith.)

Both Dr. Hanson and Mrs. Strassel have recited the obvious double-standard at work here quite well, although I will point out that then President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro encouraged rioters in Portland, Oregon, to “express” themselves after Donald John Trump’s election on November 8, 2016:

President Barack Obama has little sympathy for President-elect Donald Trump when it comes to the protests against him, and he offered up some advice for his successor: Get used to it.

“I’ve been the subject of protests during the course of my eight years,” Obama said at a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Thursday. “And I suspect that there’s not a president in our history that hasn’t been subject to these protests. So, I would not advise people who feel strongly or who are concerned about some of the issues that have been raised during the course of the campaign, I wouldn’t advise them to be silent.”

Trump and his allies have lashed out at the protesters that have surged across the nation, accusing them of being paid demonstrators ginned up by the media.

But Obama said on Thursday that the principle of free speech is a core tenet that must be respected.

“I can say across Europe that many principles that have been taken for granted here around free speech and around civil liberties and an independent judiciary and fighting corruption — those are principles that, you know, not perfectly but generally we have tried to apply not just in our own country but also with respect to our foreign policy,” Obama said.

The president’s remarks were his most extensive yet on the protests that have broken out in cities across the United States since Trump’s election in cities such as Los Angeles, New York, Portland and Washington, D.C.

Trump went after the demonstrators in one of his first statements as president-elect. “Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!” Trump tweeted on Nov. 10. The Trump transition team has not presented any evidence that the protesters are being paid.

But early the next morning, Trump praised the “passion” of his opposition. “Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!”

Trump’s allies have continued to criticize the protests, however. His former campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, has called on Obama and Hillary Clinton to denounce the protests, and on Wednesday, she said those marching were “whining and crying.”

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a loyal Trump surrogate who is under consideration to be the next secretary of state, has referred to demonstrators as “goons and thugs.” (Obama to anti-Trump protesters: Don't be silent.)

Gee, no one called those protestors “insurrectionists,” did they? After all, they had “passion for our great country.”

Like examples couple be given aplenty, of course.

Insofar as the most recent Federal indictment against former President John Trump is concerned, legal analysts Jonathan Turley and Andrew McCarthy explained the simple fact that “One Set of Rules for All” Jack Smith based his charges upon “novel” legal theories that criminalized the ability of the “wrong” type of naturalists to contest election results:

Legal experts are criticizing special counsel Jack Smith for his latest indictment against Donald Trump for accusing the former president of spreading disinformation and other activities protected by the First Amendment.

Trump was indicted out of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation related to 2020 election interference and the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, and is facing charges such as conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.

"The most jarring thing about this indictment is it basically just accuses him of disinformation — this is a disinformation indictment," said legal scholar Jonathan Turley, a professor of public interest law at George Washington University and a Fox News contributor.

"It said [Trump] was spreading falsehoods, that [he] was undermining integrity of the election — that is all part of the First Amendment," Turley said. "And I think that courts will look skeptically."

Turley said that one thing that is noticeably absent from the indictment is a charge for "conspiracy for incitement" or "seditious conspiracy."

"Those were the claims the Democrats used in the impeachment and said the evidence was absolutely clear, people like (Rep.) Adam Schiff and others saying [Trump] is clearly guilty of those crimes," Turley explained. "Well, they’re not in here."

He added: "I think there are some serious legal problems with this indictment."

Andy McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor and assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and a Fox News contributor, told Fox News Digital that Smith brought "a lousy case."

"I think all the counts have significant legal problems, and that’s even before you get to the complex problems of trying to prove Trump’s intent," McCarthy said.

McCarthy said that one "significant problem" is the fraud that Smith has alleged.

"It is not actionable fraud as the Supreme Court has described fraud — as recently as May," McCarthy said. "The Supreme Court made very clear that fraud in federal law is a scheme to swindle someone out of money or physical property."

McCarthy added that this is "exactly the kind of case" the court was telling prosecutors not to bring, "and he brought it anyway."

McCarthy also dismissed the "conspiracy against rights" charge that Smith brought against Trump.

"Smith is using a statute enacted right after the Civil War, which was actually directed at violent intimidation by the Ku Klux Klan against Black voters in the South — which doesn’t have any connection to what we’re talking about here," McCarthy explained. "They applied that law to ballot box stuffing, so what Smith is trying to tease out of that case is what then-Justice Thurgood Marshall said in the 1960s: You don’t have to have violence. You just have to have activity that functionally cancels out people’s votes."

McCarthy said the "most insidious thing" the special counsel does is "he doesn’t charge Trump with any violence because there is no connection."

"The Justice Department would love to charge Trump with seditious conspiracy, but the problem is, he said he supported a peaceful march on the Capitol," McCarthy said. "That may have been a stupid thing to do, but not a criminal thing to do."

McCarthy told Fox News Digital that Smith alleges that Trump "exploited the violence at the Capitol riot."

"That’s an unseemly thing for a prosecutor to do when he is not charging Trump with the Capitol riot," McCarthy explained. "Inconveniently for him, he has no evidence that Trump orchestrated them, or intended for them to do it."

McCarthy added that Smith put this into the indictment so he can argue that he "needs Capitol riot evidence in the trial."

"And then he’ll try to rush the trial in the run-up to the election," McCarthy said. "Then the American electorate will have Capitol riot imagery in the front of their minds as they go to vote in 2024." (Legal experts slam Jack Smith for bringing 'lousy' case against Trump: 'Disinformation indictment'. Also see Professor Turley's How Donald Trump’s Indictment Could Backfire on Joe Biden.)

As I have noted in the past, the events of January 6, 2021, the Feast of the Epiphany of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, should never have occurred. Then President Donald John Trump exercised poor judgment, which he continues to do while threatening political hack Jack Smith with such social media messages as “If you come after me, I’m coming after you," and gave groundless hope to many Americans that Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr’s, tainted victory on Tuesday, November 4, 2020, could be reversed by then Vice President Michael Richad Pence.

However, mistaken Donald John Trump was in his judgments and actions thirty-one months ago, however, those judgments and actions were not crimes in the legal sense, but they gave his enemies the ammunition they desired to further weaponize the court system against him while the Biden Family Crime Syndicate continues to skate effortlessly despite all the allegations and documentation of corruption that have come to light just in the past few weeks.

The Wall Street Journal, which is no friend of Donald John Trump, editorialized about the dangerous nature of the latest Jack Smith indictment:

Donald Trump’s post-election behavior in 2020 was deceitful and destructive, and his malfeasance on Jan. 6, 2021, was disgraceful, but was it criminal? That’s the claim in the extraordinary indictment issued Tuesday by a federal grand jury established by special counsel Jack Smith.

Democrats have long sought an indictment related to Jan. 6, but on that score what’s striking is what’s not in the 45-page document. There is no evidence tying Mr. Trump to the Oath Keepers or Proud Boys who planned to, and did, breach the U.S. Capitol that day. That was the worst offense against democracy, and more than 1,000 people have been prosecuted in connection with it.

Yet the indictment offers no new evidence to establish a connection between the riot and Mr. Trump beyond his well-known tweets and public statements. Surely Mr. Smith would have added this to his conspiracy charges if he had found such evidence. Mr. Trump is also not charged with encouraging an “insurrection,” which is the word and charge leveled by the press corps and Democrats.

Instead the indictment charges one obstruction and three conspiracy counts related to what it claims was a broad effort to overturn the 2020 election based on “dishonesty, fraud, and deceit.” The indictment concedes that Mr. Trump “had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won.”

In other words, Mr. Trump can lie about the election all he wants. But the indictment says Mr. Trump broke the law when he acted on those lies. Those actions include lobbying state officials to hunt for voter fraud, working with his conspirators to stand up substitute electors in seven states, and trying to persuade Vice President Mike Pence that he had the power to refuse to count electoral votes on Jan. 6.

This is a remarkably broad theory of “conspiracy to defraud the United States,” and one with troubling implications far beyond the fate of Mr. Trump. Mr. Smith’s theory seems to be that if a President and his “co-conspirators” are lying, and then take action on that lie, they are defrauding the U.S.

This potentially criminalizes many kinds of actions and statements by a President that a prosecutor deems to be false. You don’t have to be a defender of Donald Trump to worry about where this will lead. It makes any future election challenges, however valid, legally vulnerable to a partisan prosecutor. And it might have criminalized the actions by Al Gore and George W. Bush to contest the Florida election result in 2000.

Our legal counselors also point to Nixon v. Fitzgerald, a 1982 Supreme Court ruling that the President “is entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability predicated on his official acts.” That was a civil, not a criminal, case. But lobbying his own Justice Department to investigate voter fraud, or even lobbying state officials to find fraud, is arguably within a President’s official duties if he believes fraud occurred.

Mr. Smith alleges and offers substantial evidence that Mr. Trump was frequently told that he lost the election and that there was no provable election fraud. But Mr. Trump was also told the opposite, and he typically resides in a performance artist, fact-free world of his own imagining. Assuming Mr. Trump can find competent counsel, you can expect to hear more about this “absolute immunity” ruling as part of his defense.

None of this is an apology for Mr. Trump’s post-election behavior. These columns have been clear from Election Day that we have seen no evidence that the election was stolen, and that Mr. Trump should have resigned in disgrace after the events of Jan. 6.

But the good news of that day, and of all four Trump years as President, is that America’s institutions held up under great stress. If there was a conspiracy, it was by a gang of misfits. As Mr. Smith’s indictment makes clear, most GOP officials in the states wanted nothing to do with it. Neither did most Trump officials, and Trump-appointed judges ruled against the President’s claims. Mr. Pence was a hero. The conspiracy had no chance of success.

Yet this indictment, perhaps even more than the others, will by dint of looking back at 2020 roil the 2024 campaign. Democrats want Mr. Trump to be the Republican nominee, and Mr. Smith (whether he intends it or not) is making that outcome more likely.

We will have an election campaign that rotates between courtrooms and rallies. The carnival will make it difficult for other Republicans to be heard. A debate between Joe Biden and Mr. Trump, if they are the nominees, will be over one man’s age and infirmity and another’s attempt to stay out of jail.

We’ve argued that an indictment of a former President should be based on serious charges with enough evidence to convince most Americans that it is justly brought. We doubt most Republicans will see this one in that light, and that means we are headed for more difficult and dangerous months ahead. (Another Troubling Trump Indictment. Also see(Joe Biden Longed for Trump Prosecution over January 6.)

The commentaries provided above provide a good recitation of the facts involved in this case. What they lack, although, is any recognition that the very founding principles of the United States of America for which Dr. Victor Davis Hanson, has been a committed apologist, laid the groundwork for the fascistic totalitarianism that is upon us this country was built upon the premise of the fatal error of religious indifferentism, which was described as follows by Pope Leo

XIII in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885:

So, too, the liberty of thinking, and of publishing, whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrance, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountain-head and origin of many evils. Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. These remain ever one and the same, and are no less unchangeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity into an abyss of corruption. Whatever, therefore, is opposed to virtue and truth may not rightly be brought temptingly before the eye of man, much less sanctioned by the favor and protection of the law. A well-spent life is the only way to heaven, whither all are bound, and on this account the State is acting against the laws and dictates of nature whenever it permits the license of opinion and of action to lead minds astray from truth and souls away from the practice of virtue. To exclude the Church, founded by God Himself, from the business of life, from the making of laws, from the education of youth, from domestic society is a grave and fatal error. A State from which religion is banished can never be well regulated; and already perhaps more than is desirable is known of the nature and tendency of the so-called civil philosophy of life and morals. The Church of Christ is the true and sole teacher of virtue and guardian of morals. She it is who preserves in their purity the principles from which duties flow, and, by setting forth most urgent reasons for virtuous life, bids us not only to turn away from wicked deeds, but even to curb all movements of the mind that are opposed to reason, even though they be not carried out in action. (Pope Pius Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)

The secular, religiously indifferentist nature of the American founding was based on the quicksand of Judeo-Masonic lies that has led us to where we are today as statists who have no regard for anything other than the aggrandizement of their own power have as much contempt for the plain words of the Constitution of the United States of America as the many of the founders themselves had for Christ the King and His true Church. Why should today’s statists have any regard for a mere human document when the founders themselves had no regard for the rights and the teaching authority of the true Church, she who alone has the power to sanctify and save souls, the right ordering of which is the essential precondition, although not an infallible guarantor, of a truly just social order?

As noted earlier in this commentary, former President Donald John Trump acted impetuously in the eight weeks leading up to January 6, 2021, and it is because he is not informed by any considerations of the supernatural order that he finds himself being persecuted with ready abandon by amoral plutocrats who believe that anyone who opposes their schemes is an enemy of the civil state and a potential “insurrectionist.”

Before proceeding to explain how this is all yet another diabolical trap to convince “conservative”

Americans that they can “save” the country by rallying to the defense of Donald John Trump, who might just talk or text himself into a contempt of court charge and thence be imprisoned until his various trials take place, let me reprise my own summary of why the forty-fifth president was wrong to have proceeded as he did at the 2020 elections:

First, despite Donald John Trump’s repeated insistences to the contrary, there was never any constitutional or legal basis for then Vice President Michael Richard Pence to refuse to accept the certified slates of electors from those states where electoral fraud was alleged to have taken place. Then President Trump was not then nor is he now an expert on the Constitution of the United States and the fact that he found several attorneys who said that Pence had the power to intervene means nothing. I provided a detailed explication of this point in Put Not Your Trust in Princes: In the Children of Men in Who There is No Salvation.

The former president, who appears to have no sense of self-awareness enough to convince him that it is time for others without his baggage to make the naturalist case against statism, did not realize that there was no rational good to be accomplished in gathering his followers in Washington, District of Columbia, in the delusional belief that the mentally challenged leader of a family crime syndicate and stooge for American Marxism hidden upon the banner of "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (which actually means "conformity, iniquity, and exclusion") could be denied the presidency.

Second, I guarantee the readers of this little-read website that had Pence obeyed Trump’s desires that the Supreme Court of the United States of America would have rendered a 9-0 decision stating that the Vice President of the United States of America, acting in his capacity as President of the United States Senate, has no constitutional or legal authority to refuse to accept slates of presidential electors that have been certified by their respective states’ governors. The “woke” General Mark Milley, Chairman of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff, would have intervened if Trump disobeyed such a Supreme Court decision, a scenario that would have been without precedent in the history of the United States of America.

Third, worst of all is the fact that the date of January 6 will be associated with the needless and self-defeating events that took place at the United States Capitol in 2021 rather than with the Feast of the Epiphany of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the manifestation of Christ the King to the Gentile kings of this world.

Fourth, the events that unfolded in and around the grounds of the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, prevented Republican members of the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives from making a clear, rational, and compelling case for election fraud in the states where the election fraud did take place. The outcome would have been the same given the composition of Congress. However, the arguments would have been made in the sort of detail that the events of January 6, 2021, prevented, and even beyond the fraud that took place on November 3, 2021, and thereafter, very few people want to discuss the many ways in which Big Tech, Big Pharma and the mainslime media worked to suppress information that was unfavorable to Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (see  J6 Hysteria Is To Avoid Accountability For Rigging Of The 2020 Election).

Fifth, it is laughable that the members of the organized crime family of the naturalist “left” keep saying that all talk of election fraud in 2020 is part of a “Big Lie” strategy even though they lied boldly and repeatedly about Russian collusion as part of their effort to delegitimize President Trump’s administration and to undermine him at every turn. How many times did United States Representative Adam Schiff (D-California; see Of Men Who Keep Not Eternity in Mind) claim to have “evidence” “proving” Trump’s collusion with Russia? They were the ones who engaged in a coup attempt, not the hapless rioters of January 6, 2021, most of whom entered on a lark and wandered aimlessly with no specific purpose in mind.

Sixth, the defenders of “law and order” at the United States Capitol who remain self-righteously sanctimonious about punishing even those who committed no violent acts and had simply permitted themselves to be swept up into the chaos of the moment are, of course, the very ones who indemnified Antifa rioters in Portland, Oregon, who defaced and vandalized  Federal property, including a court house, and the rioters in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Kenosha, Wisconsin, and elsewhere. Had the shoe been on the other foot two and one-half years ago, there is simply no telling what the loose coalition of forces funded by the likes of George Soros might have done to cause chaos if there had been allegations of vote fraud that cost Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., the election.

Seventh, the events of January 6, 2021, have given the enemies of the American concepts of free elections, freedom of speech and freedom of the press within the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” and their sycophantic fellow fascists in the mainslime media, Big Tech and Big Pharma with a bludgeon to intimidate silence all critics of the statist, globalist and truly anti-American policies of the hapless Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. Although these self-anointed “defenders of democracy” are really undisguised fascists, they are shameless in their efforts to curb dissenting speech and to use the plandemic as a means of imposing the sort of repressive measures that exist in Red China, doing so all in the name of “democracy.”

This last point is very important as former President Donald John Trump lives in a world of fantasy in which he can never be wrong about anything, which is why he is constitutionally incapable of accepting the fact that “his” vaccines (gene therapy treatments) have killed and continue to kill thousands of people worldwide in addition to seriously injuring over a million others globally (Trump doubles down on COVID shots, tells Candace Owens they're 'one of the greatest achievements of mankind’). All the poor man has to do is to check the latest statistics of the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS) and then have the intellectual honesty to admit the truth. To do this, however, would mean for him to admit that “Trump” was wrong, and “Trump” does not admit that “Trump” can be wrong about anything.

These are facts, facts that are bolstered by the evidence of actual scientists, not ideologues such as Anthony Fauci, who continue to warn those who have the intellectual honesty to consider facts in a spirit of rationality that the “vaccines” are gene therapy treatments that are injuring people now and will continue to do in the future as they shed spike proteins to infect the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike (see Dr. Peter McCullough—The Inexplicable Suppression of Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Other COVID-19 Treatments, par one and Dr. Peter McCullough on Omicron Realities and VAERS Reports on Vaccine Injuries and Deaths, part two) while protecting no one against a disease that can certainly make people who get it very sick and cause death in those who do not get proper treatment or are elderly and/or have preexisting co-morbidities. One of those attesting to the facts about these “vaccines” is Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA gene therapy treatments (Dr. Malone on Madness Of Mass Formation Psychosis and Dr. Robert Malone says he can’t support Trump while ex-president stands by COVID-19 jabs. Also see Sin: More Deadly Than the Coronavirus, part twenty-four.)

Unfortunately, Donald John Trump lives in a fact-free world when the facts contradict the fantasies he has conjured up in his own imagination about his invincibility and infallibility, making him, as per usual, his own worst enemy and an easy target for the vast multitude of fascists in the Federal government (“incitement to insurrection”) and in the governments of the State of New York (alleged financial irregularities with the Trump organization) who have found three pretexts thus far to indict him while the Bidens continue to skate even after the damning testimony of Devon Archer to a closed-door meeting of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee on Monday, July 31, 2023 (see Devon Archer Testimony.)

As noted just above, the events of January 6, 2021, were needless. As explained in Put Not Your Trust in Princes: In the Children of Men in Who There is No Salvation, a mature person who had the capacity to accept the will of God in his life would have understood that there was no rational good to be accomplished in raising the hopes of his political supporters that there was even the ghost of a constitutional or legal chance for the results of an election that involved the misuse of mail-in ballots, the overcounting of Biden votes and undercounting of Trump votes, (Narrative of a perfect 2020 election eroding as Wisconsin becomes investigative ground zero), wholesale disposals of votes and, in one celebrated case, a postal truckload of mail-in votes being driven from Bethpage, New York, to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (Whistleblower Drove Ballots From New York to Pennsylvania), to be overturned.

It is one thing to believe that one has been the potential victim of fraud, but it is quite another not to recognize that one is not going to realize justice in all the circumstances of one’s life in this passing, mortal vale of tears and that one has to have the wisdom to know what is prudent and what is intemperate. Donald John Trump does not have this wisdom as he does not know God, Whose Holy Name he uses in vain quite regularly, as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church, does not have belief in, access to, and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace and thus does not understand that nothing any of us suffer in this life—including the loss of an election—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 on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and that caused His Most Blessed Mother to suffer in perfect compassion with Him.

Although former President Donald John Trump continues to be the victim of an unprecedented series of illegal attacks upon him since he announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2015 from those who hate him because they hate anyone who disagrees with them and has the ability to win office despite their claims that “democracy” is “endangered” by elections conducted on any terms other than their own and/or produce results other than the ones they try to engineer so demagogically and deceitfully, the fact of his victimization does not indemnify his bad decisions, especially with respect to the choosing of personnel to serve in his administration, inattention to detail, his obsession with  social media and constant self-justification, and his refusal to listen to constructive advice from his political allies.

Moreover, it should be noted for the seven hundred twelfth time on this site (well, it seems that way) that what is happening to former President Donald John Trump is a diabolical trap so that otherwise sane and rational human beings, including many “pro-life” Catholics, will continue to overlook the fact that the former president is grounded in nothing other than viscera, which is why he continues to support the agenda of the homosexual collective.

Although the candidacy of Florida Governor Ronald DeSantis for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination is something about which I comment after the 2023-2024 version of the March of the Midget Naturalists takes place in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on August 23, 2023, it is important at this juncture to state DeSantis’s criticism of Trump’s support for the homosexual agenda is courageous as the lavender lobby possesses just enough money to zip the lips of almost every single member of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right.”

The mainslime media took particular umbrage to DeSantis’s defense of a campaign advertisement documenting Trump’s support for sodomy, which has been documented time and time and time again on this website:

NEW YORK -- Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is defending an anti-LGBTQ video his campaign shared online that attacks rival Donald Trump for his past support of gay and transgender people, despite some of his fellow Republicans calling it homophobic.

DeSantis, in an interview Wednesday on the podcast of conservative commentator Tomi Lahren, did not address accusations that the video was homophobic but said the intent was “identifying Donald Trump as really being a pioneer in injecting gender ideology into the mainstream where he was having men compete against women in his beauty pageants.”

“I think that’s totally fair game because he’s now campaigning, saying the opposite, that he doesn’t think that you should have men competing in women’s things like athletics,” DeSantis said.

His presidential campaign shared the video on Twitter last week, on the last day of June’s LGBTQ+ Pride Month, saying, “To wrap up ‘Pride Month,’ let’s hear from the politician who did more than any other Republican to celebrate it.”

The video was posted amid a growing conservative campaign against LGBTQ rights and celebrations. It highlighted some of Trump's past statements supporting LGBTQ people, including saying he'd be OK with transgender women competing one day in the Miss Universe pageant, which Trump owned at the time of those remarks.

It also featured dark images of DeSantis with lightning coming out of his eyes, headlines that said he signed a “draconian anti-trans bathroom bill” and images of muscular shirtless men and clips of Christian Bale in the 2000 movie “American Psycho,” in which he plays a serial killer.

After the video was shared by the DeSantis War Room Twitter account on Friday, it drew immediate criticism. The Log Cabin Republicans, an organization dedicated to representing LGBT conservatives, called the video "divisive and desperate" and said it “ventured into homophobic territory.”

Republican Richard Grenell, who served as Trump's national intelligence director and was the first openly gay Cabinet member in any administration, said the video was “undeniably homophobic.”

U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a Democrat who is openly gay, criticized the video during an interview on CNN on Sunday.

“I’m going to leave aside the strangeness of trying to prove your manhood by putting up a video that splices images of you in between oiled-up shirtless bodybuilders, and just get to a bigger issue that is on my mind whenever I see this stuff in the policy space, which is, again, who are you trying to help? Who are you trying to make better off?” Buttigieg said.

Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Trump's campaign, responded to the governor's comments using a version of a derisive nickname Trump has been using for DeSantis, saying simply: “A desperate DeSanctus campaign, with a flailing candidate, in its last throes of relevancy.”

DeSantis’ campaign on Thursday declined to comment further or respond to the criticism.

The video comes as some conservatives have formed an increasingly vocal and hostile campaign against LGBTQ+ rights — from the backlash to corporations that have shown support for LGBTQ+ people to attempts to ban rainbow Pride flag displays, restrict drag shows, ban gender-affirming care for minors and restrict transgender athletes from competitive sports.

The movement has become a central point in the GOP presidential contest, with DeSantis in particular highlighting anti-LGBTQ+ legislation he’s signed and criticizing President Joe Biden for displaying the Pride flag at the White House.

Trump has pledged that, if elected to the White House again, he would sign executive orders that cut U.S. tax funding for schools pushing “transgender insanity” and health care providers offering gender-affirming care for minors.

Trump and DeSantis both frequently attack the participation of transgender women in women’s sports and label gender-affirming care for minors as “mutilation.” (DeSantis defends anti-LGBTQ video shared by his campaign and calls it a 'fair game' attack on Trump.)

Sodomy is evil. Donald John Trump cannot claim to be “pro-family” while supporting sodomy unless we have sunk to such a level of electoral depravity that it is now acceptable to consider opposition to the gender mutilation of children to “good enough” to discount a person’s support for the sort of perversity that leads logically to such mutilaton.

DeSantis has also been correct to note that Donald John Trump let Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton’s “doctor admirer,” the nefarious tool of the Chinese Communist Party named Anthony Fauci, run the country after the “pandemic” he, Fauci, helped to plan gave the enemies of legitimate human liberties the pretext for imposing lockdowns, destroying small businesses, exploding the national debt more than it had exploded during the administration of the “conservative” statist and warmongering war criminal named George Walker Bush, and made possible the institutionalizing that ballot harvesting that doomed Trump’s chances for re-election, not that the latter ran any kind of a focused or coherent campaign nor had prepared the “consent agreements” that Democratic attorney Marc Elias and his allies engineered with governors in important “swing” states, especially the State of Georgia:

GOV. RON DESANTIS (R-FL): He used to say the opposite. Let's just be clear. You go back a year or two, he would say what a great job he has done in Florida, one of the country's great governors, Florida is such a great state. He always said that for years and years. Until about three days before the midterm election then he started to attack me and I think it's because he saw that we were going to win a big victory and he viewed me as a political threat. So now he has flip-flopped on all of that and is trying to say I did a bad job.

I fought his administration to keep our state open to kids in school. Fauci, the task force, all those people. They were sending me missives. Even January of 2021, right before he left office, his task force was telling us in Florida to close. And so he didn't have control over his own government. He didn't have control over Fauci. Fauci ran that government, his last year in office. Trump should have fired him. He did not do that. He elevated Fauci and he made Fauci an international celebrity. And here's the thing, I fought back against it but the reality is, Fauci's policies were adopted in a lot of the blue states. Kids were locked out of school for a year. You had businesses shuttered for good. Small businesses.

BAIER: Should the U.S. have locked down at all?

DESANTIS: No. It was a catastrophic mistake. Back at that time, there was a lot of uncertainty, I get it. But knowing what we know now, that was a catastrophic mistake and we can never let that happen to our country again. (DeSantis: Trump Elevated Fauci And Turned Him Into A Celebrity, He "Ran The Government" In Trump's Last Year.)

Thanks to the literal personification of the Manchurian Candidate, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., the embittered political hack named Merrick Garland, and the prosecutorial hatchet man named Jack Smith, however, it will be impossible for DeSantis’s legitimate criticisms of former President Donald John Trump to carry any weight with most primary voters, who are convinced that they must support Trump to demonstrate their understandable anger against the lawless administration of statists, globalists, grifters, and censorious totalitarians who believe that “freedom” is to be used only on their terms lest the fraud that has always been the modern “democratic republic” be “threatened.”

Although I know that very, very few people read these commentaries and fewer still can wean themselves away from the madness and distraction created by the constant steam of dog and pony shows that the adversary conjures up to keep people agitated enough to waste their time and “talk radio” and to watching the babbling nabobs of naturalism on the archaic device called television or online, I continue to remind anyone who reads these commentaries that a just social order will never be established by means of the ballot box. Never. As in ever. Never ever.

The devil is the ultimate winner each election cycle as more and more people become more and more convinced that it is necessary to subordinate even a meek articulation of the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law to the exigencies of various secular saviors. No country ever “wins” with naturalism. It is because of naturalism, which has arisen because of the Protestant Revolution’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King, that we are facing the problems that exist currently.

The hour is late for the United States of America.

Over sixty million babies have been killed by surgical means in the past fifty-six years since the State of California legalized so-called “therapeutic abortions,” a bill that was signed into law by Governor Ronald Wilson Reagan, and since other states permitted abortion-on-demand at various stages of pregnancy in the years prior to the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton on January 22, 1973.

Countless hundreds of millions of other babies have been killed by all manner of chemical and mechanical abortifacients.

Untold numbers of human beings have been dispatched by means of the medical-industry’s manufactured money-making myth of “brain death” so that the vital organs of living human beings can be snatched to provide what is said to be the “gift of life” to others.

Thousands upon thousands of human beings are being killed or injured by the “vaccines” created under Donald John Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed.

Public indoctrination (referred to by most as “public education”) programs have helped to create and nurture sentiments of Anti-Theism to such an extent that a sizable number of young Americans today have no religious affiliation whatsoever, a product both of Modernity and of Modernism, to be sure.

Indecency, immodesty, and perversity are celebrated openly.

Obscenity and scurrility have been mainstreamed, thanks in large measure to the blasphemous, obscene language of Donald John Trump and the octogenarian grifter who likes to eat ice cream, relax on beaches in Delaware, hide in his basement during campaigns, and leaves the actual decision-making to Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., who spoke very obscenely in to a “hot microphone” as the “transformative” Obama/Soetoro signed ObamaDeathCare into law on March 23, 2010:

Profane language is incompatible with discipleship in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who would never issue such language from His Holy Mouth. We are, as Saint Paul teaches us, the temples of God the Holy Ghost. We are not to profane our bodies with impure conduct or speech:

From whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together, by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in charity. This then I say and testify in the Lord: That henceforward you walk not as also the Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, Having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts. Who despairing, have given themselves up to lasciviousness, unto the working of all uncleanness, unto the working of all uncleanness, unto covetousness. But you have not so learned Christ;

If so be that you have heard him, and have been taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus. To put off, according to former conversation, the old man, who is corrupted according to the desire of error. And be renewed in the spirit of your mind: And put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth. Wherefore putting away lying, speak; ye the truth every man with his neighbour; for we are members one of another.

Be angry, and sin not. Let not the sun go down upon your anger. Give not place to the devil. He that stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have something to give to him that suffereth need. Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth; but that which is good, to the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers. And grieve not the holy Spirit of God: whereby you are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Let all bitterness, and anger, and indignation, and clamour, and blasphemy, be put away from you, with all malice. And be ye kind one to another; merciful, forgiving one another, even as God hath forgiven you in Christ. (Ephesians 4: 16-32.) 

Hey, you, Catholic fraud and supporter of baby-killing, yes, you, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. Do you see what Saint Paul the Apostle wrote about you? "Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth; but that which is good, to the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers." How does the vulgar, vile profanity you spoke on Tuesday, March 23, 2010, administer grace to your hearers? Yes, of course, you have the enthusiastic approval of President Barack Hussein Obama:

Biden said President Barack Obama told him his salty comment was the best part of the ebullient ceremony in the East Room of the White House, and had tried to get him a tee-shirt bearing his now famous remark.

The vice president delivered a gushing tribute to Obama at the ceremony, then told him, in a comment meant to be private "This is a big f(expletive) deal."

The White House quickly dismissed the incident and Biden told supporters at a fundraiser in Baltimore late Wednesday that Obama was not mad at what he delicately termed his "faux pas."

He quoted the president as saying at a morning conference "You know what the best thing about yesterday was? Joe's comment."

Biden said he shot back: "If you thought it was so good, why didn't you say it?" adding that his first thought when he heard about the commotion was "Thank God my Mom's not ......"

The vice president's remarks were drowned out by laughter, but he was apparently saying he was glad his beloved mother, who died in January, had not heard what he said. (See AFP article) 

Isn't that just swell?

The pro-abortion president of the United States of America, who is surrounded with users of profanity in his administration (White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who also approved Biden's expletive), thought Biden's remark was the "best thing" about the signing ceremony at which he, Obama, signed the hideous ObamaCare into law. So what? Biden and Obama have the disapproval of God Himself, Who speaks to us through His Sacred Scriptures and His Sacred Tradition that have been entrusted to the authority of His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. "Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth; but that which is good, to the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers."

Sure, the late John Fitzgerald Kennedy and the late Lyndon Baines Johnson and the late Richard Milhous Nixon and others, including former Vice President Richard Bruce Cheney, used similar language on a regular basis. So what? "Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth; but that which is good, to the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers." Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and his fellow front man for the New World Order, Barack Hussein Obama, like all of the petty Caesars of the past whose names are long forgotten save for serious students of history, believe themselves to be exempt from the laws of God as they speak in coarse terms and promote public policies that mandate ordinary citizens to fund abject evil under cover of the civil law by the use of the confiscatory taxing power of the Federal government of the United States of America.

The shame of all of this is that Biden will be reaffirmed by many conciliar "priests." They will agree with him that what he said was "no big deal," that it is not a sin to speak in such a way. If Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is afraid of what his late mother would have thought of what he said publicly on Tuesday, March 23, 2010, what about the Blessed Mother? Isn't Biden afraid of how such vile, vulgar language offends her? Of course not. Biden is a thorough-going naturalist, enabled by conciliar "bishops" and "priests" aplenty, who has not grown up and uses locker-room language at the age of sixty-eight without a moment's worth of remorse.

As you can see, naturalism accustoms people to profanity, indecency, immodesty, and impurity to such an extent that there are far too many people in the world today who believe that the use of violence against those who hold views contrary to the accepted wokeism du jour is not only acceptable but morally necessary.

Furthermore, crimes of government-sponsored economic injustice by corporations and banks, which have increasingly adopted Red Chinese style social credit systems for granting loans and even to maintain bank accounts (see, for example, Chase Shuts Down Bank Accounts of Mercola and Key Employees) and have kept large numbers of working Americans in poverty and made it impossible for others to get jobs.

Government regulations have placed a stranglehold on small-business owners.

De facto socialized medicine has turned the American health-care industry into even more of monstrous maze of bureaucracy than it was before ObamaDeathCare become the law of the land six years ago.

Actual crimes against persons and property are excused because they are committed by those who believe that the color of their skin indemnifies them from the laws of God the just laws of men.

This country has a great price to pay for its crimes against Christ the King that have laid waste the souls of so many both here and around the world, and the imprisonment of one set of nauralists by the other is just the beginning of what will be overt persecution, inprisonment, and possible mass executions of those deemed to be "enemies" of the new world order, and the statists will be enabled by one conciliar official after another for the "necesssary" work of "purification of memory."

The Just Social Order Cannot Be Based Upon Anything Other Than Catholicism

The modern civil state, including the world’s prototypical secular civil state, the United States of America, is the result of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and, as such is the celebration of agnosticism and religious indifferentism as the foundation for personal material happiness and social order.

Father Edward Cahill made the same point in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record in those series of articles that were published later as Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement:

We have already referred to Rationalism and Hermeticism (including Theosophy, Christian Scientism, Spiritism, etc.) as characteristic of the Masonic religion and philosophy, These, which are put forward as a substitute for real religion, are fast becoming more and more widespread in England and throughout the English-speaking world. They are the most powerful dissolvents of whatever elements of true Christianity are being attempted. This element is perhaps the most deadly and dangerous aspect of the whole Masonic movement; for it cuts deeper than anything into Christian life, whose very foundation it attacks.

The immediate aim of the practical policy of Freemasonry is to make its naturalistic principles effective in the lives of the people; and first of all to enforce them in every detail of public life. Hence its political and social programme includes:

(1) The banishment of religion from all departments of government, and from all public institutions; and as a mark of the triumph of this policy, the removal of the Crucifix and all religious emblems from the legislative assemblies, the courts of justice, the public hospitals, the schools and university colleges, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 156-157.)

It is very telling that the conciliar revolutionaries have applauded these “developments” as most of their own colleges and universities have divested themselves of official control of what is purported to be the Catholic Church and have removed the Crucifix and other religious emblems from most of their classrooms. Formerly Catholic hospitals have done the same. Indeed, many of them, participating fully in the medical industry’s manufactured, money-making myth of “brain death”), have merged with secular corporations. And most Catholics in public life are fully supportive of various evils under cover of the civil law, and none of them is reprobated by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who, quite instead, praises those of them that he meets as “servants of the poor.”

To return to Father Cahill’s enumeration of the Judeo-Masonic program:

(2) The secularization of marriage.

(3) The establishment of a State system of so-called education which, at least in its primary stages, will be obligatory and conducted by the laity.

(4) Complete freedom of worship (at least for all except the true one.) (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 157.)

To the final two points of the Judeo-Masonic program as outlined by Father Edward Cahill:

(5) Unrestrained liberty of the Press even in the propagation of irreligious doctrines and of principles subversive of morality; similar freedom for the stage, the cinema, and all manner of public activities, even when injurious to the public interest, such as the operation of the betting and gambling agencies, the drink traffic, etc.

(6) The elimination of all distinction between the sexes in education and in all departments of public life and the promotion or encouragement of radical feminism.

The same programme usually includes or favours a (so-called) Democratic or Republican form of government, indiscriminate universal suffrage, and the centralization of political and administrative authority in the hands of a bureaucracy. It is opposed on the other hand to all to the national distinctions which are associated with the Christian virtue of patriotism, to the ideal of strongly organized rural communities settled permanently on the land; and finally to the organization of society in classes bound together by ties of common interest and mutual service. Hence its policy tends towards commercialism, a false internationalism and extreme individualism.

It is clear that in a social system organized according to these Masonic ideals, the masses of the people, while nominally free, and in theory the source of all authority in the State, would inevitably become degraded and enslaved. Demoralized by indulgence, deprived of the guidance and help which Christian principles give, isolated and unorganized, mostly bereft of permanent property, having a smattering of literacy, but without real education, they would have little or no power of resistance against the tyranny of bureaucracies or financial combines controlling the Press and the economic life of the country. The substantial freedom, prosperity, and true civilization which accompany or result from the Christian regime would give way to social conditions akin to those of pre-Christian Rome. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 157-159.)

Nothing that I said in college classrooms between 1974 and 2007 (and for a brief time in the Fall of 2014) or in campaigns for public office or in lectures around the nation or wrote in various publications or have written on this site contains an ounce of originality concerning the state of Western civilization as it spirals into the lowest reaches of the abyss possible, making ancient Rome seem truly tame by way of comparison. We have been given the prescient insights of such giants of Catholic scholarship as Fathers Edward Cahill and Denis Fahey in Ireland and defenders of the immutable Catholic doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King as Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, Monsignor Henri Delassus and Father Theotime de Just in France.

The Protestant and Judeo-Masonic ethos that is at the heart of the American founding and has precipitated many errors and the conflicts between false opposites of naturalism ever since was described as follows by William Thomas Walsh in Characters of the Inquisition:

(1) The isolation of the human soul from God. The indifference and godlessness of our day are directly traceable to the triumph of Manicheanism under the guise of Sixteenth Century Protestantism. Many thoughtful Protestants are now beginning to see that the Revolt inflicted a ghastly wound upon Christianity without adding anything to it. Such positive Christian elements as the Reformers taught were already in Catholicism. As for the aberrations – Luther's doctrine of grace, Calvin's predestination – how many who call themselves Protestants today believe in the divinity of Christ; a Methodist will say he believes in the existence of some vague Life Force, not a personal God. With each generation the descendants of the men and women who were led from the Catholic fold by plausible reformers promising them primitive Christianity, become less and less concerned with any religion, and more the prey of Communism, Fascism or some other panacea with new false hopes of creating something permanently good on the frail structure of human nature alone. These will not even listen to the ancient wisdom of the Catholic Church; as Mr. Chesterton wrote somewhere, “They are tired of hearing what they have never heard.”

(2) Moral confusion and nihilism. There is and can be no objective and eternal standard of conduct, except that of Christ, as interpreted by His Church. All the old sins and follies that the Church began to drive into exterior darkness two thousand years ago, have come back to destroy the peace of individuals and the harmony of society. Divorce is destroying the family, murder the individual. The free love of the Beghards and the Alumbrados is corrupting the young. What is the prevalent craze for self-destruction but a manifestation of the old Manichean despair of life? And what is the fatal race-suicide known euphemistically as “birth control” but the old nastiness of the Manichees, born of cowardice, sensuality, distrust of life itself and the Author of life? Usury, which the medieval schoolmen called theft, and capitalism, which in its reprehensible form they identified as one of the seven deadly sins (greed), are defended by dull college professors in the name of economic law; while the enslaved masses everywhere pay tribute to the modern Mammon.

(3) Intellectual confusion. The Catholic Church speaks with authority in our world in defense of the human reason against a thousand sophistries having their origin in obscure feelings or prejudices. It has become the fashion in certain academic circles to speak disdainfully of logic itself, and of the law of cause and effect, as if these were relics of medieval barbarism. It was not merely a coincidence that a Manichean thought, or rather feeling has appeared extensively in our literature, and in some of the best of it, wherever the Protestant Revolt has prepared for the return of darkness and slavery. Consider the Manichean attitudes in some of Thomas Hardy's work – especially in Jude the Obscure, in The Return of the Native, and in that frightful sneer at the end of Tess; in Ibsen's Master Builder and Hedda Gabler; in Shelley's Defense of Poetry; in the Autobiography of Mark Twain; in such plays as the Piper of Josephine Preston Peabody, The Scarecrow of Percy Mackaye, and a great deal of O'Neill's work; even in that calm Victorian, Tennyson, who puts into the mouth of a Catholic King a sentiment that would have set Bernard Gui on the trail of any Albigensian:

“For why is all around us here,

As if some lesser god has made the world,

but had not force to make it as he would,

Until the High God enter from beyond . . .?”

Not to press the point too far – for some liberty must be allowed the facies of poets! – this and much more that could be mentioned is clearly symptomatic of the sickness which afflicts a world which will not turn to Christ.

(4) Totalitarianism. Is not the present evolution of government a retrogression toward heresies that the medieval Inquisitors combatted with all their might? Communism, first propagated by the Freemasons on the ruins of Protestantism, finally set up in Russia the absolute state which the Fraticelli had invoked (in so far as the state of science and communications would permit them to envisage it): it was a perversion also of their concept of primitive Christianity, without private property. The Nazi State, set up partly in imitation of Mussolini's Fascism, as a natural reaction to Communism, had also another parentage. The ideal of the omnipotent absolute state, for whose sake the individual exists, was expressed in very similar terms on behalf of Kaiserism by Bernhardi, in 1911; and Bernhadi's teacher was Treitchke, who in turn acknowledged his indebtedness to Martin Luther. (I have developed this idea further in an article published in The Sign, with quotations from Luther and others, in February, 1940.) Thus in two different directions we trace the origins of the Totalitarian State, toward which, by imitation or reaction, the governments of the whole world are tending, to breaches made by medieval heretics in the walls of the City of God, in despite of the watchdogs of the Inquisition.

The list could be extended. All the evils that the Inquisition sought to repress, and did in great measure repress, have returned to the modern world, grown great and ravening, to feed upon our children. What then of the evils incidental to the Inquisition itself – torture, loss of liberty and even life, occasional deceit and hypocracy? Are we better in those regards? Can anyone think of the torture cells maintained by the Reds in Spain in 1936-7 to drive their victims mad, (the cells constructed by the “Loyalist” Reds “were described as hollow cement blocks four feet height and containing a cement chair and bed, built in a slanting position so that it was impossible for a prisoner to sit or lie down for more than a minute at a time. Raised cement blocks were arranged in a crazy-quilt fashion on the floor to prevent prisoners from standing up. The prosecutor (in the Cik trial) charged that the Loyalists placed rings in the eyelids of prisoners to keep them open in the glare of powerful lights.  Some of the witnesses testified that the prisoners were denied food and water and were flogged, sometimes while suspended head down from the ceiling or while cold water was showered upon them. Witnesses said the cells were pained with hundreds of yellow spots, broad black lines and scores of black and white cubes.” –  Associated Press, dispatch from Barcelona, June 13, 1939, published in the New York Sun and other newspapers, Torquemada would have shrunk from the very idea of such diabolical ingenuity.) of the unspeakable butcheries of civilians and priests by both Germans and Russians in Poland in 1939, of the unrestrained villainy of modern warfare, of all our nightmare of hypocrisy, abortion, child-suicide, unpunished murder, and what is worse even that all these monstrosities, disdain for the Deity Himself, without wondering whether we have really progressed to a point where we can look patronizingly upon the memory of a Torquemada?

All the worst miseries which men everywhere endure today, while they begin “withering away for fear and expectations of what shall come? – famine and pestilence and civil wars whose shadows may already be discerned on the dim walls of the futre – all these have been foretold by the Popes of modern tomes, on after another pointing out the causes that must lead to such effects, and pleading with mankind to turn away from them to the only possible remedy, held forth by Christ in the Catholic Church. Against all the progressive steps in the disintegration of the European Order, from the Manichees to the Communists and other state worshippers, The Vicars of Christ have uttered solemn and deliberate warnings, based upon ample information. Very soon after the reorganization of the Freemasonry by the Grand Lodge of England, in Spain, the situation was clearly seen at Rome; and in 1738, Pope Clement XII uttered the first formal denunciation of this particular heresy, this oriental dissolvent in modern guise. “If they were not doing evil, they would not fear the light,” he said of all societies, without any exception, of the Masonic type or affiliation. He forbade Catholics to join them, favor, support, shelter, or defend them in any way, or even to receive the members into their homes. Any Catholic so doing was excommunicated by the very fact, and the ban could be removed only by the Pope himself, save in the danger of death. This, as we have seen, did not deter vain, ambitious or stupid Catholics, even among the clergy here and there, from being drawn into an organization which pretended to be social and philanthropic, and masked its real aims and nature from all its neophytes, from all except a few initiates. The Popes of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries continued to raise their voices against the stealthy advances of this mystery of iniquity. Pius XII accused the Freemasons of being the chief causes of the revolutionary upheavals (antichristian in their direction) of Europe. Gregory XVI said they were guilty of sacrilege, infamy and blasphemy, and promoted heresy and revolution. Pius IX applied to them the words that Christ addressed to the scribes and pharisees who sought His destruction, “You are of your father the devil, and the works of your father you will do.” He called them the wolves in sheep's clothing against whom Our Lord and the Apostles had warned the first Christians. In another letter he referred to them as “the Synagogue of Satan . . . whose object is to blot out the Church of  Christ, were it possible from the face of the Universe.” Renewing the condemnations of his predecessors, he explicitly included Freemasons in America “and in whatever part of the world they may be.”

Pope Leo XIII warned the world that Freemasonry was the real source and center of Communist and Atheist propaganda. “In this insane and wicked endeavor,” he wrote, “we may almost see the implacable hatred and spirit of revenge with which Satan himself is inflamed against Jesus Christ.” In that same magnificent encyclical he cried out to all Catholics, laymen as well as priests, to “tear the mask off the face? Of the hidden menace. If not, he said, “the ruin and overthrow of all things must necessarily follow.: (Encyclical, Humanum genus, 1884.)

This tremendous prophecy, deliberately uttered by the Vicar of Christ, and now being fulfilled with terrible literalness as the flimsy structure built of the sands of the great apostacy of the Sixteenth Century comes crashing down about us, has of course been generally disregarded by the world, as the prophecies of Christ were disregarded. Other profound observations from Leo and his successors have met the same characteristically Christian fate; nevertheless they remain as truth.

It was Pius XI who pointed out the close spiritual affinity of Liberalism and Socialism, even when they waged a sham battle across the arena of the world. “Let us bear in mind,” he wrote in Quadragesimo Anno, “that the parent of this cultural Socialism was Liberalism, and that its offspring will be Bolshevism.” He had no more regard for one of these antichristian aberrations than for the other. Liberalism, he said, had shown as early as 1891 “its utter impotence to find a right solution of the social question,” while Socialism “would have exposed human society to still graver dangers by offering a remedy much more disastrous than the evil it designed to cure.” (Quadragesimo Anno, 1931)

This great Pope remarked that since the time of Leo XIII the “capitalistic economic regime” had “penetrated everywhere”; and that:

“It is patent that in our days not alone is wealth accumulated, but immense power and despotic economic domination are concentrated in the hands of a few, and that those few are frequently not the owners, but only the trustees and directors of invested funds, who administer them at their good pleasure. This power becomes particularly irresistible when exercises by those who, because they hold and control money, are able also to govern credit and determine its allotment, for that reason supplying, so to speak, the lifeblood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of production, so that no one dare breathe against their will. This accumulation of power, the characteristic note of the modern economic order, is a natural result of limitless free competition which permits the survival of those only who are the strongest, which often means those who fight most relentlessly, who pay least heed to the dictates of conscience. This concentration of power has led to a threefold struggle for domination. First, there is the struggle for dictatorship in the economic sphere itself; then, the fierce battle to acquire control of the state, so that its resources and authority may be abused in the economic struggles. Finally, the clash between states themselves. . .  The state, which should be the supreme arbiter, ruling in kingly fashion far above all party contention, intent only upon justice and the common good, has become instead a slave, bound over to the service of human passion and greed.” (Quadragesimo Anno, 1931)

Elsewhere, of course, Pius condemned the totalitarian theory which, reacting against the evil here described, rushed to the opposite extreme, and erroneously hald that the individual existed for the benefit of the state. None of these panaceas could reach the center of the disorder; they were all, inf fact, so many forms of Socialism, one fighting the other, but all tending toward a common end. With characteristic acuteness, Pius noticed that since the time of Leo XIII Socialism had broken up into various forms, of which he condemned even the most moderate.

“The question arises, or is unwarrantably proposed in certain quarters, whether the principles of Christian truth also could not be somewhat moderated and attenuated, so as to meet Socialism, as it were, halfway upon a common ground. Some are engaged by the empty hope of gaining Socialists in this way to our cause. But such hope are vain. Those who wish to be apostles among the Socialists should preach the Christian truth whole and entire, openly and sincerely, without any connivance with error. If they wish in truth to be heralds of the Gospel, let them convince Socialists that their demands, in so far as they are just, are defended much more cogently by the principles of Christian faith, and are promoted much more efficaciously by the power of Christian charity . . . Whether Socialism be considered as a doctrine or as an historical fact, or as a movement, if it really remain socialism, it cannot be brought into harmony with the dogmas of the Catholic Church, even after it has yielded to truth and justice in the points. We have mentioned; the reason being that it conceives human society in a way utterly alien to Christian truth.

“According to Christian doctrine, Man, endowed with a social nature, is place here on earth in order that he may spend his life in society, and under authority ordained by God, that he may develop and evolve to the full all his faculties to the praise and glory of his Creator; and that, by fulfilling faithfully the duties of his station, he may attain to temporal and eternal happiness. Socialism, on the contrary, entirely ignorant of or unconcerned about his sublime end both of individuals and of society, affirms that living in community was instituted merely for the sake of advantages which it brings to mankind. Goods are produced more efficiently by a suitable distribution of labor than by the scattered efforts of individuals. Hence the Socialist argue that economic production, of which they see only the material side, must necessarily be carried on collectively, and that because of this necessity men must surrender and submit themselves wholly to society with a view to the production of wealth. Indeed, the possession of the greatest possible amount of temporal goods is esteemed so highly, that man's higher goods, not excepting liberty must, they claim, be subordinated and even sacrificed to the exigencies of efficient production. They affirm that the loss of human dignity, which result from these socialized methods of production, will be easily compensated for by the abundance of good produced in common and accring to the individual who can turn them at his will to the comforts and culture of life. Society, therefore, as the Socialist conceives it, is, on the one hand, impossible and unthinkable without the use of compulsion of the most excessive kind: on the other it fosters a false liberty, since in such a scheme no place if found for true social authority, which is not based on temporal and material advantages, but descends from God alone, the Creator and Last End of all things. If, like all errors, Socialism, contains a certain element of truth (and this founded upon a doctrine of human society peculiarly its own, which is opposed to true Christianity . . . No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist." (Quadragesimo Anno, 1931)

Since Pius XI wrote those words in 1931, the nations of the world generally have taken long steps toward various forms of Socialism which, however different they appeared on first view, are more and more revealing themselves as essentially the same. Communism, the most radical and patently godless form was not too remote ideologically from its pretended rival Nazi-Socialism, to lie down beside it in the same foul nest, when it suited both to beget a second great war. Other nations, loving freedom, have been conquered and drawn into the two Socialist orbits. Still others have imitated Socialist regimes by reaction, or by military necessity. Few have been able to maintain fully the sacredness of human personality. The tiny nations of Portugal and Ireland, both thoroughly Catholic, are glorious exceptions. Of Spain, I have high hopes; may the Catholic spirit of General Franco prevail, and not certain others, very different and very crafty, which still exist in the country and even in high places, hungry for power. England, while fighting Hitler, has kept a friendly hand mysteriously outstretched toward his partner, Stalin; and whatever the outcome of the present war, is likely to emerge from it shackled to some form of Socialism.

Here in the United States Socialism has made more cautious but not the less evident gains. It is rather amusing, and at the same time depressing, to see that likable Socialist Mr. Norman Thomas denouncing both Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Wilkie as champions of peace-time conscription, which he says (and I think rightly) must lead toward dictatorship, and to realize at the same time that both these gentlemen are fundamentally (that is to say spiritually) as Socialistic as he is. If we judge not by what a man says he is or even believes he is, but by the antithesis set up by Pope Pius XI as a test of spirits, this conclusion becomes inescapable. Mr. Roosevelt has tried to save the country by curtailing production. Mr. Wilkie proposes to do it by speeding up curtailing production. Yet both these Liberals, as they proudly call themselves, are interested primarily in production; in the material, in the things of this world. It is difficult, of course, to see how a politician could wholly free himself from such concerns, and I am not criticising either, or discussing any issues, political or economic, between them – whoever is elected will be entitled to our obedience, under the Constitution, and no doubt, will do his best according to his lights. I would only suggest that neither has the lights necessary to solve the social problem. (It is true that both have spoken reverently in public of Divine Providence; but so, for that matter has Hitler; so have the politicians of every country, except godless Russian.) Not too much must be expected from these well-meaning statesmen. They are children of a Liberalism evolving rapidly into Socialism. Both are high in the ranks of a secret society proscribed and abhorred by the Catholic Church and denounced by Pope Leo XIII as the true source of Socialism and Communism, and the general corruption of European and world society. They are servants of the same invisible masters, to whose obedience they are bound by oaths – masters who may not even be in America, but in Europe or Asia; masters of whose exact identity they may themselves be ignorant. When they speak of “Democracy,” one must remember this background, and the fact that the elastic word has been used by many Liberals to include even the tyranny of Soviet Russia. Can Democracy be anything but a farce among men, when some of them, including the most influential, belong to a secret society whose real aims and principles have been repeatedly disclosed as political and anti-Christian? The French Catholics, in the sad clarifying light of catastrophe, have recently found the answer to this question. As Our Holy Father Pope Pius XII said in welcoming the French Ambassador after the tragedy of last summer, “Like lightening which flashes through heavy clouds, the devastating lights of war . . . have torn from the eyes of all careful and sincere observers that veil of prejudices which for half a century the voice of the Church, and especially the reiterated warnings of the last Popes, Our venerated predecessors, did not succeed in penetrating . . . May the lessons of this bitter period in acts which permit us to hope in the future for a revival of Christian spirit, particularly in the education of youth . . .” and  “the creation of a new Christian order . . . When will this desired hour arrive? God preserves the secret of it; but We beseech Him to hasten its advent.”

All this is part of a universal conflict between the church of Christ and the Prince of This World.  All other conflicts are either subsidiary to this or camouflages for it. Just now there seems to be a deadly strife between international capitalism, intrenched in the United States and gradually leading this country toward a State Socialism or (what amounts to the same thing) toward a State Capitalism, and on the other side, the seemingly more godless and godless forms of Socialism beyond the seas. Yet if Nazi-Socialism and Bolshevism, after so violent a sham battle, could so speedily come to terms, for a purpose convenient to both, what is to prevent this American Socialism, now in the making and already accepted and propagated by the dominant educational forces of this county, from arriving at mutually agreeable arrangements with both the Soviet and the Nazi forms of Socialism, whenever it may suit the real leaders on both sides to do so? Within a generation we have seen our Liberal politicians denounce the Soviet, cultivate friendly relations with it, and denounce it again – this time more coyly. As the world grows smaller in time, may not all the forms of Socialism be gathered together by skilful hands into a World Sate, such as many Masonic writers have advocated, and the League of Nations sought to achieve? It is not only conceivable,  but probable; for all forms of Socialism (even if some still call themselves Democracies) will be animated by a single obscure but powerful principle: the worship of the material, which is and always must be the negation of Christianity. Here, then, by a masterly antithesis, Pius XI has cast a strong light upon the shapes of things to come. It is all the more revealing when it shows us only the recurrence upon a larger stage of a deathless drama that happened long ago. Christ still lives in His Mystical Body, the Church, as truly as in the human body he took from Our Lady; and when the time comes for Him to be crucified again in His Church, depend upon it, Pilate and Herod that day will find a way to patch up their differences, some Caiaphas will cry, “Crucify Him! We have no king but Caesar!” and there will always be found some Judas to give the kiss of death.

Admittedly (perhaps my wish is father to this thought) we may by some miracle escape that fate, here in America. Perhaps despite their affiliations, Mr. Roosevelt or Mr. Wilkie, as political Catholic admirers of each will tell us, will be led in the right direction by a divine hand. Again, perhaps not. Only the future can reveal this. Meanwhile this much is certain: the United States, in a very few years, will be either a Catholic country (and therefore a free country) or a Socialist country, (and therefore a slave country). “He who is not with Me is against Me.” History demonstrates the unfailing truth of this dilemma.

Here on the last edge and in the twilight of the world, the stage is set for the reenactment of an ancient tragedy – or can it this time be a comedy? Here are all the actors who have appeared over and over again in that tragedy in Europe. Here we have most of the Freemasons of the world, the Jews, most of the gold and its masters; Parthians and Medes and Elamites – men gathered together from all nations under the sun, speaking one language, leading a common life; and among them heirs of all the isms and heresies that the Catholic Church has denounced throughout the centuries, and some millions of good bewildered folk who have ceased to believe much in anything, and do not know what they believe, or whether anything be worth believing; and, scattered among these millions with their roots in such movements of the past, some twenty-five millions of Catholics.

Now, either the Catholic body will come into sharp conflict with those about them, or they will not.

If they do not, it will be the first time in history that the Mystical Body of Christ (and American Catholics, like all others, are “cells” of that Body) has not aroused violent and unreasoning antagonism. This has been so uniformly a characteristic of the life of Christ and the life of the Catholic Church, that when persons calling themselves Christian or Catholic do not meet with oppositions, and strong opposition, one may well begin to wonder whether they are profoundly Christian and truly Catholic. Perhaps then it is a reflection upon us American Catholics that we have inspired so little antagonism (comparatively) thus far. Perhaps we have not been telling our neighbors the truth, the strong truth, the hard saying they will not like: that the real test of our republican experiment here must ultimately be whether it accepts or opposes the Church of Christ; that it must become either a Catholic state, or a slave state.

A great many Catholics, influenced by the Protestant or Liberal environments in which they have lived, have sincerely and deliberately set out to propagate Christianity in such ways as to never arouse antagonism. They have compromised with Socialism, they have compromised with the economy theory of history, they have emphasized the importance of various material elements. It is a sad evidence of the lack of unity into which we have been betrayed when a Catholic Justice of the Supreme Court [Frank Murphy] can publicly proclaim that “Democracy” is more important than religion; when a Catholic priest, who has taught for some years at the Catholic University at Washington and has filled our country with his disciples, openly goes to address a Jewish Masonic lodge (though Catholics are still forbidden by Canon 2335 to cooperate with or condone Masonry in any way)—and this, according to the press, not to remind his hearers of their true home in the Church Catholic, but to confirm them in their sense of injured innocence; or when a Catholic journalist burns a little incense on the altar of the economic theory of history, or a Catholic college professor condones usury, or defends the Communist cause in Spain.

Now all these gentlemen, these liberal broad-minded Catholics, many of whom are teaching the next generation of American Catholics no doubt think that they are doing a service to God in smoothing out our differences with others, and neglecting to utter the challenge which Christianity has uttered everywhere else in the world, until the opposed gnashed its teeth, and took up stones to cast. Perhaps they hope in this way to avert persecution, and gradually to bring about the conversion of the country they love to the true Faith. I do not impugn their motives or their sincerity; indeed, they are often animated by a great, if misguided charity. But if the history of Christianity teaches anything, it fairly cries out from the stones of desecrated and stolen churches that if they have their way, they will do just the opposite to what they intend, and even worse. They will lead us, if we are foolish enough, to follow them, to that abyss over which English Catholics fell, one by one and family by family, in the Sixteenth Century. The English Catholics, a huge majority, were kept comparatively silent and inactive in the face of an intolerable but gradual oppression by a small rich crafty minority, in the hope that if they ever compromised on this point and that point, they would ultimately prevail, since they were more numerous, and had truth on their side. The result was the almost complete extinction of Catholicism in England for centuries—perhaps forever. (William Thomas Walsh, Characters of the Inquisition, New York, P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1940 pp. 281-294.)

That last paragraph summarized the theme that I have tried to hammer home in hundreds upon hundreds of lengthy commentaries on this site—and in countless hours of lectures around the country and online. William Thomas Walsh’s prophetic vision of what would happen to Catholicism in the United States of America has been accomplished by conciliar revolutionaries, many of whose American predecessors before the “Second” Vatican Council sought to pave the way for the triumph of Americanist “ideals.”

Yes, the United States of America has become a slave state controlled by the same set of forces that the Inquisition sought to eliminate from within Holy Mother Church. This is because the United States of America was founded on false principles, including those of “religious liberty” and “religious indifferentism” that contributed to the rise of counterfeit church of conciliarism, whose very false spirit was being pioneered by Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America Frank Murphy and the others, including that nameless priest who taught at the Catholic University of America, described by Mr. Walsh above.

Rest Secure In Our Lady's Loving Embrace

The true victims of the past two millennia have been those Catholics who have been martyred, frequently by the brute power of the civil state, for their steadfast witness to the truths of the Catholic Faith and to the Social Reign of Christ the King. Saint Alphonsus de Liguori wrote that over thirteen million Catholics were put to death by the authorities of the Roman Empire between the time of Nero in 67 A.D. and the Edict of Milan in the year 313 A.D. Millions upon millions of others have been put to death in the centuries since. These true victims who offered themselves to the Chief Priest and Victim of Calvary, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, did not feel sorry for themselves. They did not castigate their torturers or their executioners, although some exhorted their torturers and executioners to convert to the true Faith.

This is the time for martyrdom. Yes, for heroic martyrdom, certainly white martyrdom, and possibly even actual red martyrdom itself.

The stirring letter, quoted below and  written by a Claretian priest Spain during the Spanish Revolution (1936-1939) just before he (and others with him) were martyred, demonstrates the difference between hiding the Faith in public life, whether as a matter of supposedly “clever” calculation or as a matter of habitual reluctance to speak the truth clearly no matter the cost,   and being a victim for Christ the King at all times without any exception or equivocation:

We all die praying to God that the blood from our wounds may not be a vengeful blood, but that it run red and full of life in your veins, to stimulate your growth and development all over the world. Good-bye, dear Congregation! Your sons, the martyrs of Barbastro, salute you from prison and offer you our sorrow and anguish as a holocaust to expiate our faults, our weaknesses, and as a testimony of our faithful, generous and eternal love. The martyrs of tomorrow, the 14th, are mindful of the fact that they die on the eve of the Assumption. What a remembrance that will be! We die for the right to wear the cassock and we die on the very anniversary of the day on which we were clothed in it. (Quoted in Warren H. Carroll, The Last Crusade, Christendom Press, 1996, p. 110.)

Dr. Carroll went on to quote a member of the civil guard's testimony to the constancy of the Faith of the Claretian martyrs of Barbastro:

These [blasphemous expletive deleted] fools! No one could shut them up! All the way they sang and praised Christ the King. One of them fell dead when he hit him with the butt of a gun, and this is no lie. But the more we hit them, the more they sang and shouted: "Viva Cristo Rey! ("Quoted in Warren H. Carroll, The Last Crusade, Christendom Press, 1996, p. 110.) 

We must strive to be victims for Christ the King and for Mary our Immaculate Queen as we make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our own sins and those of the whole world.

Yes, we must strive to be victims for Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen as we pray as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit.

The petty tyrants of today will fade from view soon enough. God is more powerful than any of the fools who think that their grand ideas and schemes can "save" society and make our own lives "easier" and "more comfortable" (sort of like they want to create a huge "national hospice" for us). A country that has killed over sixty million innocent preborn human beings by surgical abortion alone, no less the truly countless number of souls its wars have taken out of the Catholic Church and placed into Protestant "churches" and Masonic lodges, owes God a tremendous debt that might be repaid only by the extinction of its national existence

We must, therefore, embrace the Cross as never before, hoping that our lives of prayer and penance and fasting and mortification and almsgiving and total consecration to Jesus through Mary will help, especially by means of Eucharistic piety and our devotion to Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary, to plant just a few seeds for the day when all men will hail the Chief Victim and Priest, the One Who become Man for us to die on the wood of the Cross so that we might know an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Paradise.

Moreover, we must always remember that we have much reparation to make to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our sins and for those of the whole world. We have so very much reparation to make, especially as we approach the Paschal Triduum of Our Lord’s Passion, Death, and Resurrection.

Yes, you see, the truth is this: we, wounded by the vestigial aftereffects of Original Sin and effects of our Actual Sins, some which have been calculated quite deliberately, have at times all too tragically overthrown the Reign of Christ the King in our own souls, thus making it less possible for us to bear witness to His Social Reign over men and nations. We have shown ourselves to be far more dangerous, far more cunning. and far more effective in undermining the cause of Our Lord and His true Church as we have tried to undo the effects of Our Lord's Redemptive Act in our own souls!

Our Lord told Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque that His Most Sacred Heart was more grieved by the faithless of Catholics than It had been by the Jews who were our agents in putting him to death:

Consider that it was no less afflicting and sad for Jesus Christ to see the ingratitude of the majority of the faithful, who would have only coldness and indifference for Him in the Sacrament of His love. He saw the little esteem, nay, even the contempt with which they would treat this greatest proof of His love. He saw that no matter what He might do to be loved by the faithful, even dwelling always amongst them in the Blessed Eucharist, neither this excess of His love, nor His benefits, nor His very presence would be capable of making the greater part of them love Him or would prevent them from forgetting Him. he saw that those churches in which He was to be sacramentally present would be left for most of the time without adorers. He saw what little reverence, nay, what disrespect would be shown in His presence. He saw clearly how the greater part of His followers, who spend long hours in vain amusement and useless visits and complete idleness, would rarely find a quarter of an hour to spend before Him in the Blessed Sacrament. He knew how many others would visit Him only under compulsion and without either devotion or reverence. And finally, He saw the very small number who would eagerly visit Him and devoutly adore Him. He saw clearly that the greater number take no more notice of Him than if He were not really present in the Blessed Sacrament or than if He were a person of no consequence.

The harsh treatment which He received from the Jews, Gentiles and heretics was indeed very painful to Him, but they were His open enemies. But could we ever thought it possible that those who recognize His benefits, that those who make profession of being faithful to Him, that His own children should not only be insensible to His benefits and in no way touched with compassion at the sight of the grief caused by such contempt, but that they should treat Him with contempt by their irreverences and sacrileges? Our Saviour might well say: "If pagans and Turks and infidels had treated Me so, I might have endured it." "for if my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne it". (Ps. 54:13), but that Christians, Catholics whom I have not only redeemed, but have fed and nourished with my Body and Blood, should have nothing but contempt for Me, that they should treat Me with ingratitude, is too much. "But thou a man of one mind, my guide and my familiar: who didst take sweetmeats together with me! (Ps. 54: 14-15)

What must be the sentiments of this most generous and tender Heart of Jesus which has so loved men, and which finds in the hearts of those men only coldness and contempt? "I am become a reproach among my enemies." (Ps. 30: 12). If after exposing Myself to the contempt and hatred of My enemies in the midst of the outrages which I suffer, I could at least find a large number of faithful friends who would console Me! But it is quite the contrary: "They that saw me without fled from me." (Ps. 30:12) The greater number, seeing that I have disguised Myself under the feeble appearance of bread in order to have the pleasure of dwelling among men, abandon Me and forget Me as a person who has no place in their hearts, "I am forgotten as one dead from the heart." (Ps. 30:13)  (Father John Croiset, The Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, republished by TAN Books and Publishers.)

Thus, we should recognize full well that we bear a great share of the guilt and of the responsibility for the state of the world and for the state of the Church Militant on earth as it is at this time, and we should pray for the conversion of all those in public life, including former President Donald John Trump and for everyone who is perecuting him. Each has an immortal soul that has been redeemed by the shedding of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood. We must pray for their conversion and to accept whatever chastisement comes our way if they refuse to respond to the graces that Our Lady sends them if they persist in narcissim, deceit, and mutual self-destruction in this life to the point of their mutual castigation for all eternity in hell.

With Our Lady, as our sure guide and intercessor, may we indeed be ever earnest about making reparation for our own many sins, each of has contributed to the worsening of the state of the Church Militant here on earth and of the world-at-large.

Once again, though, make no mistake about it: our own sins and our ingratitude and our lukewarmness have exacerbated, that is, worsened, the state of the Church Militant on earth. We cannot be content to wallow in spiritual mediocrity. We must accept whatever penances and humiliations that God chooses to send us so that we can give them back to His Most Sacred Heart through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother as her consecrated slaves, especially by means of praying as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit, thus planting seeds for the glorious day of the Triumph of her Immaculate Heart and thus of the restoration of all things in Christ the King.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Our Lady of the Rosary, 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.

Saint Cajetan, pray for us.

Saint Donatus, pray for us.