Catholicism, Amnesty for Illegals, Politics, and Obama

By Joseph Andrew Settanni

“Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants.” – William Penn

This discussion will broadly cover Catholicism in America, the Church’s hierarchy in particular, the critical issue as to why denying amnesty for the illegal aliens is morally and rationally justified, national political reality, and the overly scandal-plagued Chief Executive of the USA, Barack Hussein Obama II (aka Barry Soetoro) and his nefarious plans for this country.

It used to be, meaning several generations ago, that no American politicians, especially Democrats (as almost all Catholics were Democrats or at least nominally so) would want to really experience the anger of the Roman Catholic Church; it would have meant the difference of suffering losses in many major elections or, perhaps, losing a whole national election versus a successful Democrat Party campaign.  This reality, for better or worse, had been a part of American history for quite some time, when this country was still considered a Christian nation.

As but one significant example, in 1884, just when he was on the very verge of winning the presidential election, candidate James G. Blaine (who, incidentally, was a Republican) had lost to Grover Cleveland; this was because a certain Protestant minister, at a Republican rally, had denounced the Democrats as the rotten party of “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion.”  

The Irish (Catholics) in New York State (read: NYC), in particular, were not pleased, and voted accordingly.  By his losing New York State, Blaine lost the election.

For some generations since the late 19^th century, Catholic Action was then known to be a manifest reality; there would be retribution, there would be definite political consequences.  Even Hollywood was forced to adopt, in the mid-1930s, a morality code due to quite substantial Catholic pressure from the hierarchy.  The bishops, during that past age, were not politically indifferent fellows; and, almost all Catholics, as to the basic predominant majority, were (legal) immigrants and, then, the children of immigrants in that era.

Contemporary Reality

But, today, it is a fundamentally different historical situation.   Catholicism in America, since slightly before the late 20^th century, has become substantially incohesive and, increasingly, lacks political muscle in defense of itself because of a largely wayward hierarchy, added to a subjectivity regarding religious belief among Catholics.  They have been, in addition, quite thoroughly assimilated and acculturated to American society and culture with, e. g., Catholic divorce rates being at least equal to the rest of the population, in general, during the major decline of Christianity in this country.  

Though assimilation/acculturation was partly to blame, most of what occurred was due directly to the aftermath and pernicious aftereffects of the Second Vatican Council that, unfortunately, had instituted the modernist movement within the Church, though this is often denied.  It could, also, be validly said that most Catholics had over-assimilated and, moreover, wanted to adopt/adapt anything considered by the larger society to be indicative of “Americanism” without questioning much of the sources of this often alleged form of patriotism.   As a sad consequence of such modernist corruption, however, a here most troubling question may be shockingly asked.

Are American Catholics supposed to be simply supine and to calmly wait, in this country, for Obama’s future version of their own Kristallnacht?  Such instances, among many, as Obamacare, the US Army Reserve Manual Powerpoint of April 2013 denouncing Catholicism as an instance of religious extremism, and Obama’s own explicit denunciation of Catholic education in Northern Ireland, June 19, 2013, as being terribly divisive and inherently destructive are, surely, part of the proverbial “writing” on the wall.   It need not be misinterpreted or, moreover, blithely ignored.

All these rather important matters, examples, and notable instances are not, therefore, supposedly just coincidental or accidental, as to their quite baleful and indicative natures.  He despises Catholicism.   He is an enemy.  And, it is known that he himself, as was true of Richard Nixon, keeps enemies lists.

One sees the oddity of a bigoted Black Klansman filled with hate and contempt for Catholics, meaning for those who really believe in the Faith, not simply those trashy types such as Biden, Pelosi, etc. who do conveniently conform their bizarre “religious” beliefs to fit in well with their Leftist ideology, wherever and whenever required.  Although, in fairness, to also properly enlarge the real picture, one can say that Obama generally detests Christianity, not just Catholicism, as itself being quite fully divisive, though, apparently, not Islam with its own well-known international base of jihadist terrorists and murderers.   How odd is that?

Of course, the useless National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) issues vainglorious statements, from time to time, that do not, in fact, have any real or lasting result in substantively and substantially changing the manifestly anti-Catholic and anti-Christian political thrust of the Obama Administration; this is the plain truth, which ought not need to be ever defended as such.  Their purported actions, e. g., certain lawsuits, are truly much smaller than their words, meaning in terms of what could be more properly said, one supposes, to then seriously provoke here desired ardent resistance and opposition to Obama and his quite devilish will.

The cowardly NCCB has and will still refuse to ever vigorously call for true and strong Catholic Action, inclusive of, e. g., properly excommunicating at least hundreds of those sinful Catholic politicians who support Obama; the getting of millions of Catholics to march on Washington, DC for a strong protest demonstration for freedom of religion; the instructive boycotting of any/all businesses that do favor Federal government discriminatory policies, etc.  What are some of the clearly terrible consequences of immoral and deliberate inaction, however, toward defending the Faith?

The appointed anointed shepherds of the Roman Catholic flock lack the important qualities of requisite leadership and responsibility, foresight and courage; they do greatly prefer, instead, to risk sending their sheep to slaughter houses rather than to righteously and morally protest against the rather decidedly anti-Catholic Kulturkampf that is now wrongfully occurring.1 [see: Notes]   

Those many too corrupt and venial bishops who do not speak out strongly and, also, rightfully call for Catholic Action will (unless they repent sincerely prior to their deaths) deservedly burn in Hell for eternity, which will be their warranted just reward based upon their oh-so-dubious merits.  These clerics of the higher order need to read such books as Fr. James V. Schall’s Roman Catholic Political Philosophy or Frederick D. Wilhelmsen’s Christianity and Political Philosophy.

They serve, consciously or otherwise, Mammon, not God.  Why?  They do greatly fear losing their tax exempt status as well as the extra status and power of their offices, meaning especially in terms of the many financial and related “privileges” and perquisites allowed by the State.   Admittedly, exactly the same is true for the other religious denominations.  Metaphysical values don’t seem to possess much cash value.  But, as is theologically known from Holy Scripture, Jesus authoritatively said that it is totally impossible to serve both God and Mammon.  

Perhaps, all those very spiritually disgusting bishops who do not really oppose Obama need, therefore, to be appropriately called, to coin here a rather needed ugly term, “Mammonites.”    Their sacerdotal duty, as a result, is being extremely neglected, which puts the matter rather mildly.   Of course, their mediocre and not exactly saintly consciences, as they may protest, are probably as clear as any average man’s, which really isn’t saying that much.

The hierarchy, meaning the discredited bulk of them, has been morally compromised; with the passage of time, the ecclesial structure will, therefore, become more of the nature of a social services agency, as a mere adjunct of the Federal regime handling the matters pertaining to collectivism within society.   

Instead of offering now much needed ethical, moral, and spiritual resistance, the main Church has been wrongfully content to go along with the Weimarization of America, as is seen with its openness toward the illegal foreigners, the invaders, who are being openly favored by most of the bishops.2   Their immorality services the corruption as the corruption further facilitates the immorality.

It can be, moreover, correctly observed here that Liberal Catholicism, as is represented so superbly by the New Mass, the Novus Ordo, a truly terrible product of Vatican Council II, fully supports the moral and spiritual decay involved.3   One can readily perceive and appreciate so keenly, therefore, how the nominalist thinking, represented by pragmatism, relativism, and positivism, do then fundamentally guide the observed corrupted thinking, the venial calculations of profitability, made by the NCCB, not fear of the Holy Ghost, certainly.  

Meanwhile, the openly expressed intentions and very disgusting attitude of the Obama Administration, the tyrannous regime, have been, thus, empirically known and, moreover, successfully implemented more and more over a number of years by now.  The rudiments of a police-state tyranny are being put into place with spying, secret police operatives, and various other illegal (and “legal”) means of control upon and surveillance of the so victimized populace; civil liberties and rights are being curtailed as new “freedoms” and “rights” are supposedly proclaimed.

There can then be, one rightly suspects, no rational or acceptable valid excuse, given by the hierarchy, that the Leftist Kulturkampf situation is, thus, still mainly unclear, vague, or, perhaps, generally not yet really known, meaning as to the basic and cognate implications and ramifications involved.   What is now importantly meant, therefore, by this aforementioned clarifying statement? 

The Kenyan-born Obama has willingly made, again and again, his obvious thoughts and vile desires, for supporting and implementing anti-Catholic and, in general, anti-Christian suppression and oppression, rather clear.   No obscurity exists.   He has not been ambiguous.  No one need guess at the truth of this matter.  There is, upon some cogent examination, nothing that very overly subtle about his notable hatred or scorn for Catholicism, for Christianity, which is directly opposite to his favorable views about Mohammadanism, of course. 

He has a markedly skewed appreciation for only one type of religion, though his personal beliefs are themselves, in truth, rather doubtful in terms of what he may really believe, especially as a believer in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals (a neo-Marxist tome).  But, actions do usually speak louder than words.

The intrusive and omnipresent instrumentalities of the State, the IRS, NSA, EPA, DHS, HHS, etc., are being, aggressively and increasingly, directed against the American people.  This is occurring, moreover, as Obama’s dedicated establishmentarian supporters declare otherwise, of course.  The corruption of the Administration of Ulysses S. Grant seems too petty and inconsequential in contrast; Richard M. Nixon’s Watergate pales into mere insignificance unworthy of even a slight footnote in American history textbooks.  What has, is, and will be occurring has, thus, given a new definition to the term scandal.

Obama, America’s Salvador Allende, has made his radical-collectivist intentions demonstrably clear; but, there is no domestic version of an Augusto José Ramón Pinochet Ugarte, anywhere to be found on the political horizon, to help save the Republic.  This reincarnated Allende, a Leftist revolutionary, is quite exceedingly ambitious to the nth degree. 

One needs to properly understand, however, that tyranny is always highly reactionary in that the tyrant wishes to restore what is the very ancient social pyramid paradigm of the approximately top 5% ruling over, lording over, the oppressed 95% of the population.  Some political history can help to educate on this particular topic.

Sir Henry Sumner Maine, back in the 19^th century, and author of such books as Ancient Law and Popular Government, had correctly pointed out historically that the rise out of a status-based society to one of a free-contract society had greatly helped develop social-civil liberty and freedom for the common people.  One can see that the tyrants of the Communist (and Nazi, Fascist, and other) type wish, of course, to recreate, to redevelop, the tyrannous ancient model by destroying either all or almost all free-contract relationships.  A self-governing people under God are anathema to tyrants everywhere.

The private sector, a free-market economy of any kind, is to be essentially abolished or, at least, almost totally minimized into economic insignificance; once free citizens must, therefore, be then ruthlessly transformed into being mere unitized subjects of the seemingly omnipotent and omnipresent State.  Thus, it is the case that all of the so-called progressives or ideological liberals/leftists are, therefore, truly hardened reactionaries of the worst sort.   

Because of their ever unyielding insatiable lust for power, such liberal and leftist fiends, meaning control freaks, are always the true enemies of free people everywhere; such ideologists are authoritarian-minded establishmentarians who do truly hate free government, meaning genuine constitutional politics.

They do passionately and earnestly prefer the artificial status conferred through statism/collectivism, because as willing adherents of the regime, they then expect to be the happy beneficiaries of that corrupt status-based society built upon power relationships, not merit or virtue.  The presidential ruler of this much changed and depressed country would, as is only expected, fully deny this very interesting truth.

Obama is, nonetheless, a neo-Marxist and dedicated statist genuinely intent upon destroying or at least neutralizing as much as possible any real opposition to his manifestly quite ardent and ideological desire for the total, secularist collectivization of America.   Free government is to be obliterated.

He certainly wants to create a European-style, social-democratic State having a complete social-market economy ideologically geared toward the having of a Leftist Utopia, with full sociocultural secularization becoming the norm.  However, much of the support for his policies and thinking ought not to be falsely ascribed to, e. g., White guilt, as it often is.4   The increase of secular attitudes and opinions in society should not be discounted as a definite factor.

This is as De-Christianization continues in this crescively debased country filled with abortion, sodomy, euthanasia, pornography, etc.   How is this vividly substantiated?   Through the dubious courtesy of the US Supreme Court’s enthusiastic gay rights decisions made this year, moreover, this surely degenerate nation now positively celebrates sodomy and its glorification, as it deservedly sinks into the cesspool of history.   As is seen in America, the spread of Godlessness assists greatly the success of tyranny among men.

However, what really had strongly motivated this was not as, e. g., Rush Limbaugh wrongly thinks it is, meaning the often jabbered Leftist issue of “fairness” or that certain selected matters are so thought to be unfair.  One needs to here critically perceive that so-called fairness is merely an ideological code word for envy.  Limbaugh needs to read Helmut Schoeck’s quite instructive book entitled: Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior.   It is actually envy, one of the Seven Deadly Sins, which actually lies at the demonic root of collectivism, not idealism or the usual altruistic propaganda surrounding fairness.

The sodomites were obviously envious of the heterosexuals and their institution of marriage, which will be ultimately destroyed by these rulings as an institution; and, therefore, the wanted destruction of marriage is the real unmentioned intention and purpose of these evil radicals set behind the convenient façade of demanding sodomite equality that exists, instead, as a new privilege to be guaranteed by the secularist-progressive State.   For as George Orwell had intriguingly put it in his Animal Farm, all animals are equal but some are “more equal” than others.

But, now, all those who do seek to still oppose sodomy, according to the US Supreme Court’s emotional argumentation, are to be forever publicly stigmatized as evil people who wish to be contemptible bigots, just prejudiced swine, wrongly opposed to the overt expansion of true human rights; this quite vicious denunciation, made in no uncertain terms, includes vile aspersions cast against all morally traditionalist Christians, not just orthodox Roman Catholics.  The (assumed) enemies of a truly enlightened humanity have been, thus, clearly identified as such by the nihilistic Left and its demonic supporters.

One realizes that the necessary logic of the created legal situation, furthermore, is that those churches not willing to perform these perverted sodomite “marriages” will be, sooner than imagined, charged with discrimination and a violation of civil rights, totally regardless of what Obama says now to the contrary.   As William F. Buckley, Jr. was often fond of quoting Leon Trotsky’s useful maxim, who says A must say B. 

Traditional Christianity, as a direct consequence, is to be logically declared unlawful; violators of these sodomite rights, now guaranteed supposedly by the US Constitution according to the Court, are then to be considered and prosecuted as criminals.  The same consideration, e. g., is true today, as a parallel historical analogy, regarding any landlord who refuses to rent an apartment or house because of racial reasons.

It is legally classified as an act of clear discrimination and bigotry, prejudice and unfairness, no longer tolerated or permitted by the law.  With ever aggressive secularization in America, the churches and synagogues, though curiously excluding all the mosques, cannot be exempted from the law and its logical application in strongly favoring the evil of sodomy.  The law is a teaching tool.   If America was still a Christian country, of course, this could never have happen; also, by the way, the perversion of sodomite “marriage” could never have happened either; thus, manifest de-Christianization has its many immoral and degenerate consequences.

To many people, of course, this, the persecution of traditionalist Christians, is all just presently absurd or, perhaps, simply unthinkable, as sodomite “marriage” was itself, e. g., just a few decades ago, as to its final legal actualization.   However, to properly understand the actual ideological course of such coming events that should be anticipated or expected, meaning as to the then future realities in this debased country, it is appropriately necessary to think the unthinkable, and as quickly as possible, so as not to be caught terribly unawares when it, in fact, happens.

For instance, over fifty years ago by now, the John Birch Society had indicated, more and more, the fundamental direction that domestic radicalism and radicalization would go in this nation, though the members were all, repeatedly, denounced as just a dumb bunch of miscreant fools and far-rightwing crackpots or obscurantist nut cases.   They have been, however, historically vindicated more than ten thousand times at least.

Of course, in the truly vile midst of all this, the NCCB prides itself, so unconscionably, in terms of being prudent; and, these oh-so-worthy men of the cloth think that they are genuinely exercising the cardinal virtue of prudence, for they are or wish to be among the nice people in this degenerate society.   Rather, Catholicism needs to be always boldly and righteously defended, not to become or act as social-services utopianism or the Social Gospel variously adopted and adapted from those liberal, progressive-minded Protestants who had first developed it in the late 19^th century. 

What happened to the Catholic Church?  It is the same thing that basically happened to all the so-called mainstream denominations in this country.  They have been substantially coopted by Leftist ideology to greater or lesser degrees.   Teachings and doctrines have been greatly modified and watered down to variously suit modern tastes and fashions, mores and sensitivities.

Religion, as to its traditional sense, was increasingly devalued and, consequently, forever relegated to a mere support or secondary role as largely compared to the supposed greatness of social service work; nevertheless, it is yet a form of sinful idolatry, meaning the making of the worship itself greater than God.  Metaphysical order itself was increasingly made a fairly debatable issue fully subject to different interpretations and nuances depending upon variable feelings and attitudes of a subjective nature.

The many good dogmas, doctrines, and teachings of the Church have been immorally displaced in the corruptive quest for and rush toward relevance, popularity, community service, and an obnoxious desire to just supinely embrace a generalized Christianity that, to the popular mind, appears fairly indulgent of a variety of vices.  Sociologically, the American people have done a full quantum leap away from the paradigmatic understanding of domestic religion once thoughtfully chronicled, in 1955, in Will Herberg’s Protestant, Catholic, Jew.

As a related result, ethical reductionism and rationalization, not unexpectedly, often holds sway; any supposed pursuit of theological truth is but a vague and indistinct afterthought at best; for most Catholics, their belief, such as it is, has become only a cultural affectation or attitudinal pose, as with most Christians in general these days.  Latitudinarianism is, in a sense, totally triumphant at last, while millions of Americans, for instance, do call themselves “spiritual” people, though not religious; many others are just “cultural Catholics” as there are, also, merely, e. g., cultural Jews.

Christianity is Not Niceness

What is so greatly needed today, however, is vibrant and manifest Catholic Action to be quite actively advocated and done by the Church Militant; there ought, therefore, to be no supine going along to get along with these ideologically avowed and open enemies of Holy Mother Church.  This is not, therefore, exactly the right time for being nice, for not wanting to be somehow too offensive with one’s Catholic religion and its many moral demands, assuming it ever was, of course.  Machiavellian social diplomacy is to be studiously rejected.

As Flannery O’Connor spiritually knew, only the violent bear it away, for Heaven is not stormed by any nice people who had, ideologically or otherwise, conformed to the world and its immoral ways, meaning the fact of sin’s existence among fallen men in a fallen world.   Without the moral uplift of traditional Christianity, most people most of the time do tend to generally sink toward, more or less, the lowest common denominator of human behavior expected.  The proclivity toward sin negates human attempts at perfectionism, meaning the impossible arrival of Utopia by any euphemism.

Yet, the majority, on average, do think of themselves as being fairly nice people who generally practice tolerance and hope for it in others.  Niceness becomes a synonym for Christianity as being merely a version of altruism or humanitarianism writ large.   Such matters as sacrifice and martyrdom are, it seems, wholly unknown religious concepts entirely foreign or strange to both committed modernists and postmodernist alike.

But, one can listen, intelligently, to the sagacious and instructive words of Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, a missionary and evangelizer: “Our Lord was crucified by the nice people who held that religion was all right in its place, so long as its place was not here, where it might demand of them a change of heart.  The gravest error of the nice people in all ages is the denial of sin.”

The rather unconcealed lack of very substantial and substantive opposition by the ecclesial authorities, by the anointed shepherds of the flock of Christ, signals to the laity at large that these jaded ecclesiastics are not really that serious about sin and its harmful personal, moral, social, and cultural consequences.  And, how is this empirically determined to be true?

Obama, e. g., is still prominently invited to Church-sponsored dinners, and such public events give the overt impression that the hierarchy, for political or pragmatic reasons, just doesn’t mean what it says, in any scripted kinds of denunciations of anti-Catholic matters, such as certain quite obviously immoral provisions and regulations of Obamacare.   There is a public and notable gap, one can perceive, placed between words and actions, which can be observed to have public consequences basically favorable to Obama.  This should not be that surprising.

Mixed messages create terrible confusion and a deliberately sought ambiguity where, on the contrary, moral and spiritual clarity are, thus, surely most needed for instructing the Catholic people, the laity in the explicit care of the bishops, meaning the sheep.   Therefore, the secular-oriented vanities of these spiritually debased clerics are, thus, quite plain to see. 

They do labor under a tautology that is ethically, morally, and spiritually destructive, and for which they will be made ultimately answerable to Almighty God, for their all of their disgusting and repulsive sins of both commission and omission.  

They do blandly assume that their positions of grand ecclesial authority vouchsafe, axiomatically, their known ability to take positions highly detrimental to the Church in this country (in the false name of prudence) and wanting to be nice people.   Why?  Because they feel they can quite justifiably take such positions due, of course, to their ecclesiastic possession of such noted authority simply enabling them to do so, which is a blatant rationalization of sin.  It also, at the least, borders upon the sin of presumption in thinking that they may somehow know better than Almighty God as to the decisions to make.

Circular reasoning of this nature is, however, surely set along the ever well-known path paved with good intentions that leads, however, to Hell.  These compromised men of the cloth, therefore, ought to know better, if they have a proper true fear of God beyond their sophisticated desires to act pragmatically, of course.

This is the same tautological fallacy, for a useful parallel analogy, as is seen in legal positivism whereby anything that is declared to be legal must be lawful because, after all, it is the positive law of a country.  This crass thinking totally ignores, for instance, any classical Natural Law teachings that overtly declare anything truly violative of Natural Law cannot, by definition, ever be true law simply by being said to be legal.   

For useful confirmation, one can read such works as E. B. F. Midgley’s The Natural Law Tradition and the Theory of International Relations and Heinrich A. Rommen’s The State in Catholic Thought: A Treatise in Political Philosophy and his The Natural Law.

Why, however, may this be here confidently asseverated?  The famous Nuremberg Trials of the Nazis affirmed, for all time, the significant and unavoidable fact that no rationalist or other appeal to legal positivism can be supposedly made for laws that knowingly do allow for the heinous butchering, noted mistreatment, or common persecution of any human beings. 

Therefore, the NCCB, the collective high hypocrites of the Church in America, is then completely wrong, ethically, morally, and spiritually, not just in set terms of plain logic and sound reasoning.  Contrary to the supposed dictates of the ultra-sophisticated cognoscenti of the mass media, academia, and others, what must happen, therefore, as soon as possible? 

The bishops must immediately cease, for at least for the sake of their own souls, to try to be nice people and, instead, to now valiantly and honestly defend, preserve, and protect their so beleaguered Catholic people against the vile forces of the regime’s intentional Kulturkampf.  Are they deliberately blind to the truth?   Are they deaf to the hateful words being spoken by Obama and his minions, his ugly sycophantic supporters, in and out of this enormously corrupt and necessarily scandal-plagued regime?  

Can they actually be that incredibly naïve and trusting in light of what has been explicitly said and done to significantly harm Catholicism and the Church, besides the quite immoral attack upon Christianity in general?   These are just all, one can guess, merely some rhetorical questions, since the rather obvious answers should be intelligently known by now.  

The bishops, one may guess, expect that they can freely dance with the devil without ever being burned, which is never possible.  The ugly price of the major and willful tarnishing of their imperiled souls must, therefore, be ever paid for such evil cavorting.  

If they do not form an adamantine opposition to such statism, tyranny, now, while many means still easily exist for rightly doing so, the opportunities later on will, as can be logically assumed, become fewer and fewer, with the passage of time, as the immoral and brutal forces of the welfare-warfare State are then further consolidated.  

There is surely no extensive reason to waste any valuable time possibly guessing at what may or may not happen.  The danger is now; the crisis is real; the need for Catholic Action is very justified and certain.   It is time now to wake up and take needed action, meaning before the regime later becomes fully consolidated, more empowered, and better prepared to then crush its enemies wholesale.

But, the tainted bishops, so much in tune with and in love of the vilely secularized sociocultural and sociopolitical order, basically do refuse to ever actually fight, contest, against the aggressively demonic Kulturkampf.  And, as a truly direct result, the Left and its very sinful laicist ideology goes from victory to victory fundamentally unchallenged by the hierarchy because it, knowingly, accepts a great deal of such radical cognition as, thus, being assumed moral truth.  This can be seen, for instance, in the question of amnesty for illegal aliens.

The bishops’ support for amnesty for the illegal aliens puts them decisively on the side of the powerful, meaning the ruling class/elites who strongly favor it, and against the powerless, the common people of America, the majority of its citizens, who do absolutely oppose amnesty.5   A regime that rules against the expressed will of its people is, by definition, unquestionably despotic.  This can be related to how the US Congress, especially its leadership, wants to impose its will against the citizenry.   

What needs to be denounced?  The hierarchy prefers to be with and supporters of the morally corrupt establishmentarians and neo-Marxists and, thus, against the necessity to defend valid Catholic teachings as to the always proper need for justice and morality in political affairs, as Fr. C. N. R. McCoy, author of The Structure of Political Thought: A Study in the History of Political Ideas, would have agreed. 

Of course, they do always falsely claim that what they simply just want is social justice.  The eminent Archbishop Sheen, who was able to honestly see reality for what it is, had insightfully remarked that Judas is the patron saint of social justice.   The traitor dared to complain to Jesus about the fact that oil for anointing His feet could be better used for the poor (Judas full well knowing that it meant less money for him to steal, as he did, from the Apostles’ common fund).  So much for that false justice called social.

In the way that Samuel Johnson said that patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel, so also is loudly prating about “social justice” the last tawdry excuse of these so worldly and quite contemptible bishops regarding the illegal foreigners, these lawbreakers, in this nation.  Their sham solicitation smells like old dead fish, not spiritual inspiration.

The NCCB doubtless finds it logically very hard to fairly mount an effective opposition when the regime, as can be so readily observed, supports many of its own bogus social and political principles as to, e. g.,  (family-destroying) welfare programs and policies for such allied funding purposes.  For the ever alleged sake of the poor, the bishops do exist as active collaborationists, as vile Quislings, for as Christ truly said, the poor, they are always with you, meaning that there are ever greater spiritual concerns much higher than any concern whatsoever for poverty.   

People are not automatically sanctified merely by being poor or, for that matter, illegal aliens, those who wrongly/knowingly defied the immigration laws.  Spiritual poverty, moreover, is the truly worst form of poverty, as all Christians ought to know.

The creative tergiversation, on the part of the hierarchy, was seen during the 2012 national election when the vast majority of Catholics did not vote for Mitt Romney, meaning as the then non-Obama candidate.   Liberal Catholicism is, moreover, accepting of too much relativism and subjectivism; it is emblematic of Social Gospel Christianity and Vatican Council II in that most progressive, radical, and liberal Catholics see no real distinction between what they basically believe and the radicalism and collectivism offered, in fact, by the Democrat Party.  

And, thus, the NCCB has not at all actually attempted to correctly educate, edify, or disabuse such Catholics as to the definite and unchanging doctrines, teachings, and dogmas of the Faith versus all of secularist modernity and its anti-life viewpoint, which is, by definition, entirely heretical.   Furthermore, the continued and obvious refusal, as is aforementioned,  to put out a call for Catholic Action speaks volumes as to the contemptible wretchedness of the crass and duplicitous thinking on the part of the bishops, meaning those who really ought to know better.

They have, as one can easily guess, so profoundly both abdicated and rejected their many spiritual and related responsibilities and duties in this grave matter of seriously confronting Obama and his demonic dictates.  Why is this to be said?  Marxism is a secularized form of Pelagianism (aka the denial of Original Sin and its results) known as neo-Pelagianism; and, any kind, type, or form of socialism/collectivism, as with Obamacare and anything like it, is merely a lesser variety of such blatant heresy added to the lust for power.  And, this is a very important point to profoundly consider with its many cognate implications and ramifications.

All heresy, as is theologically known, is verily hated by God since, among many other grave reasons that can be given, millions of souls have and will go to Hell directly because of such quite harmful erroneous opinions that cause people to believe that evil is good and vice versa.  And, what further can here be properly said?

One can still intelligently recognize, as an added matter, that even a corrupt despotism that is imposed democratically does not then supposedly cease to be despotic; might does not make right.  The same, in a parallel historical sense, can be also said of 18th century “enlightened despotism” that did not thereby somehow stop being actually despotic, in its true nature, merely because it was cleverly denominated as enlightened. 

Democratic despotism is the reification of political democracy that makes the will of the people seem supreme and sacrosanct; one the major founding fathers of the modern democratic ethos, Jean Jacques Rousseau, helped foster the growing glorification of democracy so much so as to allow for its despotic nature for enforcing its will, the will of the majority.  Democratic socialism, for instance, claims to fully incorporate Rousseau’s thinking, but Christianity does not ever theologically or morally allow for the absolutist posturing, totalist affectation, of any ideology.

When put in the requisite light of correct understanding, there really is then, in truth, no such thing, moreover, as Christian Socialism or Marxist Humanism, or even Nazi Humanism for that matter.  All ideologies, whether those of modernity or postmodernity, are axiomatically offensive to God as they are, of course, idolatries that must be always unquestionably abhorred as such.  They are, in fact, inherently evil invitations to and provocations for sin and its terrible consequences.  This has been known for centuries by now, especially concerning collectivism.

Among the many popes who have properly done so, Pope Leo XIII, in 1878, had fully condemned all of collectivism in his important encyclical entitled: Quod Apostolici Muneris.  Early in the 20^th century, Pope St. Pius X had so clearly said that, “No Catholic could subscribe even to moderate socialism.”   Pope John Paul II had, of course, personally experienced the evils of Communism in Poland; moreover, he partly helped to defeat the Soviet Empire.  

Therefore, there is no appropriate justification, religious or otherwise, for the NCCB to be yielding to the contemporary onrush of collectivism in America, meaning under the foul guise of social justice or any other such slogans as excuses.   There is no truly Catholic defense of the politics of the corrupt ruling class-establishment that so urgently wishes to hypocritically embrace the illegal foreigners who have unjustly invaded this country and who are actually, in truth, detested by the corrupt elites.   However, what is the real issue at stake?

They, the corporatists, capitalists, and their establishmentarian supporters, just want cheap and easily exploited foreign labor; none of them are, in fact, supposed champions of social justice or Catholic social teachings.  Thus, no one need rationally deny the obvious truth of what has been written here; it can be, moreover, objectively researched as to the cold and hard facts involved, regardless of the NCCB’s self-serving propaganda and protestations existing to the contrary.

Conclusion

However, when the shepherds of Christ’s flock terribly lead the sheep astray, the always righteous anger of the Lord cannot be far behind.  The ongoing and future suffering of America, under Obama and his loyal minions, is a part of the manifest price to be always justly paid for infidelity, for such contemptible faithlessness.  The NCCB, consequently, will not be simply allowed, by God, to act with impunity. 

Persecution of the Church is, therefore, to logically follow upon the moral and economic disintegration of the corrupted political order, which was once, at least formally, upheld by the legal constraints of the US Constitution.  The post-constitutional regime, as is correctly noted by Mark Levin and others, of the debauched Obama nation and its sinful idolatry, manifested in statism, is to devilishly conquer the banal apathy and sly indifference of the hierarchy.  The noted lack of Catholic Action, thus, facilitates tyranny.

It needs to be properly understood, furthermore, that de-Christianization and full secularization is, of course, Obama’s ultimate goal for making a very compliant population of neopagan subjects whose earthly god is then to be the State, the Hobbesian Leviathan, the Mortal God.  

This movement toward statism has been, as correctly noted, done in the face of the many foul outrages quite deliberated perpetrated by the Obama Administration, meaning by an overtly tyrannous regime and its many eager demonic supporters.  The Constitution has been perverted; that document was created to restrain the government, not the people.  It is seen, nonetheless, that no great civilization is conquered from without until after it has corroded itself from within, which has been, in truth, fairly confirmed throughout the course of recorded human history.

Cultures and civilizations, as was superbly demonstrated by the Catholic historian Christopher Dawson, are absolutely dependent upon religion, which is, of course, no less true regarding the entire history of Western Christianity itself.  

But, fortunately, all such earthly power regimes, dealing necessarily with fallen creatures in a fallen world geared toward imperfection, do eventually fail and fall; this is, of course, because the supposed always absolute pursuit of the evil and ever corrupting centralization of power cannot really continue forever.  There are empirical limits and the passage of time wears down the forces of the imperium, no matter how mighty they may appear. 

Immorality, more and more, takes its toll upon the imperfect human beings who are, after all, just human, not terrene gods.  The perverse lust for power, as it was and is known to Lucifer, can never be truly satiated because it originates in Hell, the primal source of all perennial and unrequited human dissatisfaction.

Sinful people are, thus, inherently incapable of creating the assumed New Eden on earth (aka Utopia).  And, God, regardless of all of human cunning, is ontologically guaranteed to ultimately win in the end, not Obama.

Athanasius contra mundum!

Notes

1.) Kulturkampf (literally, "culture struggle") is a term is taken from the era of Reich Chancellor Prince Otto von Bismarck, during the then oppressive autocratic days of Imperial Germany, when he and his (staunchly pro-government) Protestant and secularist supporters urgently wanted to eradicate all of Catholicism in his country, from approximately 1871 to 1887, through various means.  

It was a quite bitter and very strife-filled conflict between church and state: the truly uneven struggle between the very powerful forces of the German government and the Roman Catholic Church over the control of education, marriage, and Church appointments. The tremendously harsh conflict involved was the modern desire to bring about absolute secularization through encouragement of much anti-Catholic bigotry and hatred throughout Germany. 

The Catholic Church was depicted as a truly international enemy and Catholics as necessarily disloyal citizens of the empire.  But, fortunately, Bismarck had lost.   In America, so far, Obama is winning to the detriment of all sincere and believing Christians, not just faithful Catholics.

2.) This term refers to the terrible days of the degenerate, democratic-socialist Weimar Republic of Germany that helped paved the way for Adolf Hitler and Nazism by its morally, socially, culturally, and politically despoiled nature. Thus, Weimarization is the corruptive, Leftist ideological process of clear transformationism that Obama strongly favors for America in the vicious effort to thoroughly corrupt and, eventually, destroy it.   As a defender of human liberty, Leo Strauss, a 20^th century thinker and philosopher, had valiantly tried to warn America against Weimarization and tyranny in general.

3.) It, the Novus Ordo, now just sadly exists, essentially speaking, as the vain experimental effort to Protestantize the Catholic Mass, by having it done in a country’s vernacular language, as an asinine means toward ecumenism that had, nonetheless, failed quite miserably; this was in the too absurd attempt to supposedly attract Protestants to Catholicism. 

On the contrary, many poorly catechized Catholics, seeing in their untutored minds that the Protestants in the vernacular “do it better,” had, thus, simply decided to become Protestants.  It was a natural kind of rationalization by simply thinking of basic “Christian” religion in purely reductionist terms of common reference.   Q. E. D.

4.) But, the real reason why the majority of liberal/progressive White people are basically acquiescent with what is going on, meaning as seen through, e. g., affirmative action, diversity, multiculturalism (aka anti-White hatred), etc., is not as Limbaugh erroneously thinks, namely, White guilt.  What can be noted here is what in sociology is called latent versus manifest.  That which is manifest is merely what can be seen on the surface, so to speak, as a kind of excuse; the real reason is what is latent, meaning hidden from view, unless proper investigation and critical analysis is correctly applied.

That which so simplistically appears to be “White guilt” is really one of the ancient Seven Deadly Sins: Vanity.  It is vanity, in truth, from which too many (liberal/leftist) White people suffer from in that they honestly believe, in their sinful conceit and pride, that all non-Whites can only gain their genuine dignity, worth, and their status as human beings through the sufferance of White people, which is as racist a point of view as one can get.  Limbaugh and others just do not really understand what is going on in America.  

It is not actually White guilt as to a motivating force; it is vanity, which is a mortal sin, according to Catholics, that merits going to Hell, if left sincerely unrepented prior to death.  Misinterpretations of cause and effect ought to be, therefore, intelligently avoided.  The noted progenerative cause of vanity had, thus, produced the resultant effect known or usually referred to as White guilt.

5. Of course, admittedly, the corrupt leadership of both major political parties, the Republican Party, the rightwing socialists, and the Democrat Party, the leftwing socialists, are in complete agreement for the giving of this quite massive amnesty that will so ultimately affect, in some estimates, between at least 11,000,000 and 70,000,000 people, over several or more decades.   They will come, thus, to extensively overburden this sad nation’s already highly stressed and virtually bankrupt social-welfare system and its various generous varieties of entitlements.

Historians in the future, it is predicted, will logically divide notable chapter headings, in their textbooks, between pre-Great Amnesty America and post-Great Amnesty Amerika (the way the Left spells it).  It will be as if two very different kinds of countries, not unexpectedly, had existed before and after this absolutely significant divide, in this nation’s history, meaning in the time then prior to its final fall and ignominious collapse.  The resulting country will greatly resemble Mexico or worse; Spanish would be the second mandatory language, as, e. g., bilingualism exists in Canada.

Bibliography

Christopher Dawson, The Formation of Christendom.

____. The Dividing of Christendom.

____. The Making of Europe.

____. Religion and the Rise of Western Culture.

Fr. C. N. R. McCoy, The Structure of Political Thought: A Study in the History of Political Ideas.

Alasdair Macintyre, After Virtue.

____. Whose Justice? Which Rationality?

____. Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry.

Thomas P. Neill, Makers of the Modern Mind.   

E. B. F. Midgley, The Natural Law Tradition and the Theory of International Relations.

____. The Ideology of Max Weber.

Fr. Moorhouse F. X. Millar, Unpopular Essays in the Philosophy of History.

John Passmore, The Perfectibility of Man.

Heinrich A. Rommen, The State in Catholic Thought: A Treatise in Political Philosophy.

____. The Natural Law.

Fr. James V. Schall, Roman Catholic Political Philosophy.

____. Christianity and Politics.

____. The Modern Age.

____. The Order of Things.

____. The Politics of Heaven and Hell: Christian Themes from Classical, Medieval, and Modern Political

          Philosophy.

____. Reason, Revelation, and the Foundations of Political Philosophy.

____. At the Limits of Political Philosophy: From the "Brilliant Errors" to the Things of Uncommon

          Importance.

____. The Mind That Is Catholic: Philosophical and Political Essays.

Frederick D. Wilhelmsen, Christianity and Political Philosophy.

____. Being and Knowing.

____. Man's Knowledge of Reality.