The treacherously-pious surrender of the realm of the practical: reflections on the long-time abandonment of the Catholic doctrine on the state.
Probably the last concerted effort to advance the Catholic doctrine on the state took place at the time of St. Thomas Aquinas, after whose prodigal labors the word-smithing Nominalists summarily claimed the field. Their efforts to chop away all “unnecessary” reasoning or fine distinctions—hence the phrase “Oakham’s razor”—having been in its own way remarkably akin to yesterday’s logical-positivists or today’s linguists or semioticians. This supremely consequential doctrine on the state having thus been carefully buried before it could see the full expository light of day, that intellectual epiphany whose realization is plainly and in a sense providentially reserved for our own very time. These intellectual enemies taking advantage, as is their tireless wont, of the fact that the Church is always keen on making allowances for the vagaries, changes and chance-happenings of human affairs. A Church intellectually indomitable yet by nature “simple as doves” often unwittingly providing a cue for these biblical “enemies of mankind” to claim that “things had changed”, and that therefore the practical application of doctrine had to give way. No doubt prefaced with a dismissive “don’t worry, this will only be temporary”. After all, they no doubt continued, Europe was no longer living under the integral Catholic state of a St. Louis IX—back then when Oakham and the premature George Bush Phillip the Fair shared the same era—and that therefore—tidy syllogism indeed—the rules-of-the-game of political life had to be entirely reassessed. Oakham and his ilk down through time always especially love these cleaver-like, perfunctory, argument-prohibitive conclusions (who could be against such admirable, sharp-edged neatness?). All these polite and politic concessions and allowances ultimately coming to embody that horrific new heresy which so sturdily under-girded the deliberations of a robber-council Vatican II: a many-headed hydra epitomized in the flock-abandoning (if quibbling and ill-admitted) admission of the legitimate existence of so infernal an institution as the “post-Christian state”. Together with all the diabolical abominations that come in its train. Starting with the marginalization of the working-man and ending in eugenics, sodomy-marriage, euthanasia and abortion-on-demand.
Alas, this jelly-like cowardice or loss-of-will seems to be the constantly-threatening fate of a divinely-appointed system which “carries in earthen vessels” treasures of divine teachings and means-of-grace, boons which by the same divine design depend upon the cooperation of humankind. Such mortals being prevailed upon to find some air-tight excuse to rearrange God-given priorities, but of course ever so deftly, subtly and by stages. Nothing that bad now, is it? as the dentist might aver to the child whose eye-tooth has just been pulled. But rather unless supreme vigilance is maintained, to keep firmly intact these very priorities—unless lamps are carefully protected from blowing or burning out—what results rather quickly is an abominable, compromise-oriented, caesaro-papist state church. Such as we Catholics have in the USA today. Since “no man can serve two masters”. The ultimate offspring of this process-of-compromise being inevitably after the order of an obsequious, supine Byzantine Christianity, so soon to produce a typically-state-prostrate Orthodoxy, or ultimately even a monstrosity like the highly-cooperative “Official Church” of Mao Zhe Dung. For the fact is that neatness isn’t really a worthy top priority, but love, devotion, obedience, adoration truly are. And they often require the clumsiest and least-tidy of demonstrations for their worthy and heartfelt manifestation. For we are indeed put on this earth precisely to make these fervent, properly-pyramided orderings, or we will spend our eternity in Hell. Where “the buck stops” indeed, Obama, and all “you have to understand” excuses finally come to naught.
But this doctrine, that of the Two Swords, civil and ecclesiastical, “both of which are borne on behalf of Christ” (bull Unam Sanctam of the martyred Boniface VIII, d. circa 1300)—that which clearly erects the Church, the interpreter and arbiter of the Christian Revelation, as the divinely-appointed moral guide of earthly powers as well—this doctrine continued stoutly to be accepted by the common folk of every Catholic land. And indeed upheld by the Church as well, if in the far-too-usual-event in too quiet a way. This singularly essential teaching which can even in its most exalted form prepare the way for the sort of theocracy that was the 1500-year-old Papal States, the direct heir to the ancient Roman organically-democratic statecraft, headed both politically and spiritually by the pope, to the bountiful and unparalleled benefit of its grateful citizens. Here being a church/state principle whose popular acceptance followed easily on the heels of the obvious common sense involved, since in words we of my age sometimes still heard while still very young, as a precious legacy from a previous time, “if you can’t trust the Church, who can you trust?” And it has indeed never been the Church itself which has been unjust to anyone, but always some flock-infiltrating wolf in sheep’s clothing who has got over the wall. Typically through the machinations of some variant of that lay investiture in mortal struggle against which a saintly Boniface VIII so valiantly—if to ever slandering enemies ignominiously—gave his life.
But in the invariable arrogant, citadel-invading, top-down fashion of the ever-infiltrating Jewish or crypto-Jewish cabal—whose whole incredibly-negative anno domino purpose can be summed up in a ruthless opposition to Catholic Faith, for which immemorial goal are financed heresies of every stripe—this docility to the Church on the part of the “unclean” common man would be chuckled at as backward, ignorantine. Invaders who, once the wall is breached, instantly set about setting a certain rigid, cynical, un-regenerated pecking order. All the while the noted in-the-know “rule of the practical” is steadily made to supply for all things, in the case before us forming a mammoth and unprecedented new institution closely allied with an incipient bloody radical unification of European and later global political and economic life. A forced unification, always in history preceding ultimately from centralized loci of power, strongly supported by international slave-trading and other precocious-globalist interests. Its first beginnings clearly traceable back to the waning days of the 1200’s, when true and crusading knighthood was in many ways still in flower. And when the gild merchant still commonly made a worker no mere cog in a machine but a shop-to-counter seller of his own goods, one of the only dependable bulwarks against that hostile invasion of foreign products such as abounds today. And that so neatly and tidily, as with Christmas layoff/downsizing packages, destroy the lives of men. All for this wonderful, humming neatness, and inseparable exclusionary hauteur. While predictably come to be regarded as an intolerable species of punctilious, sanctimonious exactitude would be any insistence upon so dry and “practically irrelevant” a matter as the absolute sole and singular supremacy of the honor and glory of God over “all things here below”. That towering injunction which since David, Josias or the Machabees, and ceaselessly throughout anno domino time, has been found to be the indomitable protector of the poor, the sole bulwark against tyranny, the prodigal cornucopia of boons of a strictly earthly kind.
Indeed, the assertion of the primacy of God’s openly and indeed officially expressed honor would come by stages to be regarded as a sort of sacrilege-all-its-own: to thus bring ineffable matters of the soul into the grubby arena of practical life. Ah, the sanitary, anti-septic purity of such a view! And so efficient, convenient and painless—at least for a while—in so many ways, too!. Soon-enough there would be wildly-praised “democracies” which would devote themselves almost entirely to spreading this primacy-of-the-state, indeed of the globalist marketplace, by fire and sword. So that come to be regarded as the prime goal of pure and unadulterated statecraft—soon to grow abstract physics-lab-modeled “counterbalancing” mechanisms that would claim to compete with the Heavenly Spheres—would be the hermetical sealing of the one realm against the other, of church against state, and state against church. Indeed, in practical terms, of earth against Heaven, and vice-versa. This for the doughty upholding of a brutal-yet-oddly-sanctimonious state, and indeed, or so the ironclad logic goes, for an the maintaining of the very pristine purity of religion itself! Ah, the power of words.
Certainly, Jesus never gave so much quarter to those who perverted Jewish law to selfish ends, and who used the state to condemn Innocence Itself to death. And furthermore there isn’t a shred of real practicality in any of this trend toward the radical separation of church and state, with the inseparable abject glorification of state prerogatives, taking the place indeed and in many cases of the very glory due to God alone. Here being rather only the ultimate infallible surrender of the law of God, that of life and love, to that of might and morbidity, tyranny and death. For it is only the divine law which saves us from these deadly things: first of all, that written on the human heart, and finally that codified in Catholic Faith and Civilization. These the perpetual and incontestable formatives of law itself. All the manifold treason of a latter-day profane changing-of-the-guard, of their ultimate replacement by the ribald, detestable sodomite crowd, having been accomplished in the hush and hurry, the blush and bother, of the Jewish pseudo-messianic, secular-messianic cause. That which since around 1300 has been sedulously and insidiously advanced through the obscure channels of Jewish financial and—always the ultimate aim—political and psychological oversight and power.
But in fact recognition of all authority as preceding from God, the consequent placing of all offices and functions under His benign and Heavenly sway: these form the mandate, with a special kind of expediting priority, of all mankind, and especially of the Church. Only in this way is the state rendered benign rather than harmful and tyrannical, to which the fallen nature of man would invariably have it devolve. The deadly and morbid dynamic of which unredeemed humanity the Jews have indeed taken up as their own special, sanguinary cause. For only in the manifestly harmless provisions of God’s law—revealed in the greatest certainty and exactness in Catholic Faith—can mere brute “police power” force be made subservient to good things. Here being a “kindly light” of Cardinal Newman before whose warm glow the modern pagan state indeed now stands unmasked, baring its cruel visage for all to see. While typically an easy matter is this good prioritization of which we speak, yet how swiftly and heavily fall the penalties for its non-observance! For the denial of spiritual “first fruits” ever justly claimed by Almighty God. The giving of which honor and glory is itself a source of unparalleled delight to those typically humble and ordinary citizens who possess that greatest of treasures: a childlike heart.
The chief failure involved in this extended capitulation of Catholic prerogatives can be capsulated in the conceiving of religion as a sort of magic, as if little if any correspondence on our part were required. But in fact although God works miracles yet these require our faith and loving correspondence, or they will be withdrawn, and replaced with their chastising opposite. This presuming upon heavenly wonders—this treating of them as almost the mere proprietary mumbo-jumbo of magicians on a stage—manifestly involves grave penalties indeed. Here being the reason we lost that “one brief shining moment” of the pre-Vatican-II years, when there was so much hope, so much carelessly presumed upon. Our attitude, the orientation of our hearts, being the chief first fruits of our Faith, and it follows that if we surrender all the social and psychological, political and disseminational means into the hands of our enemies—breezily depending upon some miracle to save the day—to thus expect Sacraments and miracles to sustain us as if by some automat-like mechanism, indeed some species of talisman-like power, even a sort of luck—this is to tempt God in the most disgusting way, and to bring down a curse instead of a blessing. It is to be one of St. Louis DeMontfort’s “false devotees”, destined for heavy penalties, perhaps eternal flames.
Hence too the increasingly dark aspect to this sing-song story of the “practical” and indeed the “pious” denial of the Church’s doctrine on the state, for just because the ranging forces of the Synagogue, and its bewildering variety of secret-society handmaidens, have so thoroughly and with so little resistance claimed the “practical” sphere, doesn’t mean they will be satisfied with these gains. That according to the imagery of my mid-century childhood, they will just “go home and take their marbles (or gold pieces or insignia-of-office) with them” No indeed: the remorseless and untiring aim of anno domino Jewry is the utter eradication of the very memory of the Savior; it’s undying resolve is to utterly overturn the Chair of Peter. Hardly will the Church be allowed ultimately to enjoy that “after all preferable” (as we were blithely informed in high school religion class) condition of becoming a purely spiritual society, ministering solely to spiritual needs. Indeed facilitated in all of this by ever-“helpful” Jews. Who are ever so solicitous to take away from us clumsy, “non-business-minded” Christians all earthly concerns or cares. In this little ill-admitted but much-observed formula indeed being duplicated in practice that which Luther so heretically taught in theory, in his heresy of the Purely Spiritual Church.
But our good Savior, crashing this party before it can properly get off the ground, will not have it, this surrender to the very Synagogue which crucified Him, of all authority over the practical affairs of men. Breezily permitting them to “business as usual” rob, kill and enslave on a global scale. No, Christ will be king. “I shall reign”, as He so forcefully declared to Sr. Josefa, around 1923, not too long before the approaching storm would break. And our own backs against the wall, we are come to the realization of that millennial goal, in the practical demonstration—so evident before the eyes of all men today—of the utter folly and bankruptcy, the genocide and treason, of this “post-Christian” view. Of an abject capitulation to those Jews—and a new breed of abominable “Christian Jews”—who now crucify humanity as a whole, whether economically, politically or militarily, just as they once did the Lord. For to these “not like the rest of men” it is really all much the same. While in the holy embrace of this beloved Convict the masses of humanity will soon rise and break their age-old chains, forged already in deicide machinations of Temple precincts of old.
Who will “stand in the breach” today, when the Church has largely been kept—in some ways for centuries, and especially for the past fifty years—from reiterating the doctrine of Hildebrand, by way of ceaseless, sometimes barbarous interference and intrigue? For we must imperatively find a way to pronounce the sacred syllables once again, in statute, solemnity and daily word. As a Church, as a nation, a Civilization. The priesthood having been basically silenced, the Petrine Chair again usurped, it is “the laity (who) will save the Church”, in the burning words of Pope St. Pius X. Men and women working together in their own humble, unique and imaginative way. Freeing Holy Mother Church from chains she wears today, her nobility still lovingly detected, as always, by the loyal and discerning eye. Even in this darkest, deepest dungeon her enemies could design. Some ideas toward which resurgence we offer on this page, in this Crusade.
But coming into full flower here is this popular-participatory aspect of the Catholic state: a laboriously-cultivated bloom, as “when knighthood was in flower”, one most distinguished by concrete forms of consultation. A complex form of reciprocity, hammered out in political “custom and usage” across misty ages in time, thereby rendered inimitably suitable to the patois, the cultural nuances, of the people, the Croatian or Russian narodi, the Navajo dineh, involved. Hardly was this consultation mere discussion, that “talk is cheap” sort of thing which today so arbitrarily rules the political day. The people becoming the butt of oily evasions of a Pilosi or a Reid, deftly sidestepping this ancient popular political will. One in which for one thing going to war was in a special way no mere royal or presidential whim.
Indeed it is no mere accident that this Lion of the Tribe of Judah, this Offspring of David, came during the reign of an Augustus, a time of universal peace, of the vanquishing of tyranny for a time. His glorious epiphany not gracing the era of some Alexander, some Napoleon, Antiochus or Holofernes, but rather of those noble Romans, to whose brief age even the holy Augustine would look back admiringly, himself a truly and loyal Roman to the end. That Roman state which established cooperative amicitia relationships with other lands whenever possible, wherever it went. And although one can draw many dark parallels between the USA since George H.W. Bush and those of a later-Roman Caligula or an Antiochene-Greek Antiochus IV, yet one finds few if any between an Obama and a Marcus Aurelius, or a great many others of noble and clement Roman rule. Thus the question I pose here: can one meekly obey, serve in the conquering military of a pseudo-system whose whole purpose is war, murder and rapine? Under the rigid command of a global elite not really tied to the patria or nation from which the word patriotism properly comes? Alien, overbearing men who mobilize the economy, the military and a warped and perverted version of the law to suit their twisted Master Plan?
This consultation—missing in all tyrannical rule—would be progressively scraped from the time of Philip the Fair of France in the early fourteenth century. The true democracy of our virile forefathers of which the Magna Charta itself was only a shadowy ghost, having had its heart removed in subsequent revisions, while the ink was yet wet on the original page. That true liberty being foregone in the abandonment of “backward medieval” rights and agency-packed practicalities signaling a political “progress” which would henceforth put men in stout if well-argued chains. Charter-confirmed distributive prerogatives being replaced by dry and abstract legalities easily word-smithed or “developed” beyond recognition into the mockeries of justice we have today. And against which evolution the nobles of Runnymede had stated their case, as it turned out, in vain. A valiant effort on behalf of which DeMontfort, nephew of the vanquisher of the Albigensian political plague, would later give his life. And be near-universally called, by today’s “historians”, a fool for same.
But hardly can this gamut of prerogatives be said to have been validly surrendered, by ancestors frustrated or put to sleep in their chains, suffering a steady loss of the rights of lords at every level to exhaustive and discretionary consultation. Within that sovereignty which to be valid must in some way sound the input of the entire body politic, represented by proxy in this way or in the full assembly of the tribal moot. Hence when denied does this inalienable popular right to consultation over matters of war simply devolve or return to the individual mind and soul. That harbor, that repository, where it must in truth and ultimately be said to have resided all along. If under the stewardship of one-time-good stewards, noble men-at-arms. Surrogates trusted to “come clean” with the issues involved. While it is in the Frankpledge that we will speak our minds once again, and find and embrace those upwardly-tending ministers-of-our-thoughts, of our hearts, to convey the popular will on high. Men bound to us by ties of affection, of trust, and not remote and aloof, with pretenses of patriotic loyalty only a sop to keep us in chains.
Hence when the exercise of conscience—that most fundamental and incontrovertible right of individual man—is progressively removed to higher and higher realms, hid in frowning clouds of hauteur, until it lodges stubbornly in a finance-installed chief authority, who in practice clings to an “I am the state” discretionary absolutism when it comes to war, then the whole meaning of trust and docility is undermined beyond repair. For then we really have no state at all, but a piracy on the seven seas.