+St. Mary Magdalene+
Having viewed certain segments of the Republican National Convention this past week, I need to once again caution Catholics about the attitude they should adopt concerning voting choices this coming November. From comments viewed in social media forums, it appears that some of those identifying as Traditionalists and even pray-at-home Catholics have fallen into the trap of believing that they are justified in their ardent support of the alternatives to Democrat candidates, meaning the Trump/Vance ticket, when this behavior is not in keeping with Catholic teaching.
Overall, last week’s convention was reminiscent of high school pep rallies highlighted by surprise guest speakers, with a smattering of Masonic play-acting and revelry thrown in. The rival sports teams were facing off, with all the hoopla that entails and the rah-rah-siss-boom-bah was deafening. Jock-style egos swelled and audiences applauded. Rock bands wailed in the background and candidates and attendees alike clapped and swayed to the tunes. It was the perfect example of a largely middle-class crowd that never matured intellectually beyond their high school or (liberal) college days, hence the convention’s appeal. And a good number of Catholics, who should be more intelligent and dignified, (given the very nature of the faith they profess), instead seem to have climbed on the bandwagon fueled by Trump’s attempted assassination and his underdog status as a (falsely) convicted criminal.
If Catholics were cheered and attracted by what they saw at the convention, then they are woefully lacking in the education department — Catholic education, that is. This, of course, is not easily obtained, yet is still available to those who care enough to inform themselves. The popes, also Catholic clergy and laypersons writing in the 1940s and 1950s stress the necessity of Catholics to educate themselves in these matters. The superficial attitude of those attending the RNC is absent from the solemn evaluations written by these men. Rather a sober and somber attitude is encouraged that weighs the common good and our bounden duty to best promote it. Levity and recreation have their place, but given the dangers facing Catholics today, it is best minimized or put aside to make way for in-depth, serious discussion of the issues. To understand the Church’s teaching on voting for the less worthy candidate, visit: https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/a-voting-primer-for-catholics-why-pius-xiis-directives-must-be-obeyed/
And now have a situation where the president has withdrawn from the race and may very well resign his presidency. VP Harris, already the presumptive nominee to run against Trump, could then become president, a nightmare waiting to happen. Yet Harris could become tripped up by campaign financing regulations and state laws dictating the assignment of delegates. Federal lawsuits could be filed that would complicate matters even further, perhaps even delay the election. We are standing in the path of a runaway train and anyone on the tracks is bound to be mown down. Where this goes, no one can be certain, but all should be prepared for the twists and turns that lie ahead. And education is key to rightly judging this situation, whatever the outcome may be.
Democracy and the Catholic
While Democrats have accused Republicans of destroying democracy and vice versa, some Republicans have pointed out that this country was meant to be a republic, not a democracy. Yet those speaking at the convention typically referred to our form of government as a democracy, and while Catholics may think they know what that term means they most likely are not seeing it through the eyes of the Church.
A series of articles written in the 1970’s-1980s by the French Traditionalist Solange Hertz, later assembled into books, readily shows that from its inception, America was a Masonic nation, and democracy an “experiment” that clearly has gone awry. While the Church does not condemn the right kind of democracy as a viable form of government, the popes have repeatedly warned Americans that Catholics cannot endorse the liberal principles of democracy, nor the nationalistic excess known as Americanism, condemned by Pope Leo XIII, that now permeates the conservative atmosphere. Pope Leo wrote: “The underlying principle of these new opinions is that, in order to more easily attract those who differ from Her, the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions. Many think that these concessions should be made not only in regard to ways of living, but even in regard to doctrines which belong to the deposit of the faith… They are of opinion that such liberty has its counterpart in the newly given civil freedom which is now the right and the foundation of almost every secular state… From the foregoing it is manifest, beloved son, that we are not able to give approval to those views which, in their collective sense, are called by some ‘Americanism’” (Testem benevolentiae, 1899).
Of course Americanism, spawned by “Catholic” liberalism, later gave way to Modernism and ecumenism. And it is ecumenism that dominates Protestant evangelical teaching today, with so many expressing non-denominational beliefs. Trump himself lists as non-denominational, although his family religion was largely that of the anti-Catholic Norman Vincent Peale and his positivism, Protestant teaching the Church ruled as Quietistic, psychologically damaging and out of touch with reality. Trump also was an admirer of Billy Graham.
Despite its condemnation, Americanism was officially revived by Paul 6 even before he usurped the papal chair. Those who have read the opening chapters of The Phantom Church in Rome will know that Giovanni Montini, Paul 6, worked secretly as an OSS operative during World War II, and without the knowledge of Pope Pius XII, forged secret alliances with the newly formed CIA in the late 1940s which later guaranteed his election as “pope.” The CIA funded state elections and other causes in Italy following the war and actively worked to secure the election of John 23 in 1958, in direct violation of Pope Pius XII’s infallible election constitution, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis. This is documented by correspondence and FOIA requests published by international attorney David Wemhoff, in his 800-page work, John Courtney Murray, Time Magazine and the American Proposition. The book reveals the fact that psychological warfare was implemented against Catholics for two decades to accomplish the establishment of ecumenism in the Church through the invalid elections of John 23 and Paul 6, in the name of democracy.
As a result, the false Vatican 2 council adopted the heresy that all men have the inherent right, (as taught by the renegade Jesuit John Courtney Murray and vehemently opposed by Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton, Rev. Francis J. Connell and a few others), to follow the dictates of conscience and that governments must recognize that right by suppressing any opposition to this belief. This is opposed to the Church’s God-given right to preach that the Catholic Church alone holds the truth and all other religions are false. Basically the formal endorsement by Vatican 2 of this proposition, which directly contradicts the necessity of the hierarchy to defend the Church’s rights, as expressed in Pius XII’s infallible constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, is what accomplished the downfall of the Church.
Ever since this event, there has been an effort by non-Catholics to unify into one amorphous mass as “Christians” and usurp the place of the Church as the sole proponents of the Bible and Gospel teaching, a new “Holy Roman Empire” of sorts, founded through revolutionary means on the ruins of Roman democracy resurrected in France and America. This union must be accomplished before one-world government is established, in order to place everyone on the same religious page, just as Freemasonry had to destroy Catholic monarchies before establishing American and French democracy. The roots of what such a Protestant mimicry of the Church’s empire can be found in the creation of the Sillon in France in the late 1800s, a purportedly Catholic effort to “Christianize” democracy. “Le Sillon (“The Furrow” or “The Path”) was a French political and religious movement founded by Marc Sangnier (1873–1950), which existed from 1894 to 1910. It aimed to bring Catholicism into a greater conformity with French Republican and socialist ideals, in order to provide an alternative to Marxism and other anticlerical labor unions” (Wikipedia). Just as he had done with Modernism, Pope St. Pius X thoroughly routed the Sillonists, as seen below.
Our Apostolic Mandate
“[In its early days], the Sillon did raise among the workers the standard of Jesus Christ, the symbol of salvation for peoples and nations. Nourishing its social action at the fountain of divine grace, it did impose a respect for religion upon the least willing groups, accustoming the ignorant and the impious to hearing the Word of God. And, not seldom, during public debates, stung by a question, or sarcasm, you saw them [young people] jumping to their feet and proudly proclaiming their faith in the face of a hostile audience. This was the heyday of the Sillon; its brighter side accounts for the encouragement, and tokens of approval, which the bishops and the Holy See gave liberally when this religious fervor was still obscuring the true nature of the Sillonist movement.
“For it must be said, Venerable Brethren, that our expectations have been frustrated in large measure. The day came when perceptive observers could discern alarming trends within the Sillon; the Sillon was losing its way. Could it have been otherwise? Its leaders were young, full of enthusiasm and self- confidence. But they were not adequately equipped with historical knowledge, sound philosophy, and solid theology to tackle without danger the difficult social problems in which their work and their inclinations were involving them. They were not sufficiently equipped to be on their guard against the penetration of liberal and Protestant concepts on doctrine and obedience.
“The truth is that the Sillonist leaders are self-confessed and irrepressible idealists; they claim to regenerate the working class by first elevating the conscience of Man; they have a social doctrine, and they have religious and philosophical principles for the reconstruction of society upon new foundations; they have a particular conception of human dignity, freedom, justice and brotherhood; and, in an attempt to justify their social dreams, they put forward the Gospel, but interpreted in their own way; and what is even more serious, they call to witness Christ, but a diminished and distorted Christ… No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker — the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work…
“[The Sillon’s] brand of Catholicism accepts only the democratic form of government which it considers the most favorable to the Church and, so to speak, identifies it with her. The Sillon, therefore, subjects its religion to a political party. We do not have to demonstrate here that the advent of universal Democracy is of no concern to the action of the Church in the world; we have already recalled that the Church has always left to the nations the care of giving themselves the form of government which they think most suited to their needs. What We wish to affirm once again, after Our Predecessor, is that it is an error and a danger to bind down Catholicism by principle to a particular form of government…religion ought to transcend all parties…
“This organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations… has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.
“Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train. We fear that worse is to come: the end-result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men who become brothers and comrades at last in the “Kingdom of God”… [For they say]: “We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind.
“We know only too well the dark workshops in which are elaborated these mischievous doctrines which ought not to seduce clear-thinking minds. The leaders of the Sillon have not been able to guard against these doctrines. The exaltation of their sentiments, the undiscriminating good-will of their hearts, their philosophical mysticism, mixed with a measure of illuminism, have carried them away towards another Gospel which they thought was the true Gospel of Our Saviour” (St. Pius X, Our Apostolic Mandate). We urge readers to study this entire document. For more on democracy and the situation today, go to: https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/dr-disandro-redefines-government-today-and-pope-pius-xii-on-the-obligation-to-vote/
Implications of St. Pius X’s condemnation of the Sillon
The false pope John 23, as a nuncio under Pope Pius XII, would later exonerate Sangnier in a letter sent to his widow in 1950, which is no surprise. What is described above by Pope St. Pius X, who some say had the gift of foresight, is what Christian conservatives hope to achieve under Trump. And it could well be the foundation laid for a one-world “Christian” church, excluding true Catholics. Yet the Church, and her members alone have the right to rebuild the City spoken of by St. Augustine, if now it can be rebuilt at all. And given the above, certainly it cannot be rebuilt on existing democratic principles. Pope Pius XII believed for a time this was possible but was rewarded by his pro-secretary Montini with an attempted poisoning. This lest the pope discover that his teachings and plans were being sabotaged by his enemies, who were even falsifying the Fatima message to promote their democratic ideals.
Following a vision of Christ that occasioned his recovery from the illness brought on by this poisoning, Pope Pius XII all but shut down the Vatican, and so it remained until his death. If Catholics must choose Trump as the lesser of two evils, let it be an informed decision. Modern-day democracy is not the Catholic ideal. Catholics are to remain politically impartial, meaning that whenever possible, strictly speaking, they should avoid all party affiliation and register as Independents, wherever this is allowed by the State. Any perceived religious affiliation with non-Catholics must be led by the Catholic parties, since the Church alone has the right to rebuild the City, as the popes have always taught. Catholics should avoid at all costs joining in the misplaced zeal of the masses for any particular candidate, given the nature of the democracy that is being proposed and the danger it poses to the faith. They should never forget that it was the falsified ideal of democracy that was used to destroy the Church, which means their loyalties must be adjusted accordingly.
In summary, Catholics must realize in the end that this type of democracy is aligned with the secret societies, as Pope St. Pius X observes, and they can never lend their enthusiasm, public approval or seeming acknowledgment of such principles. After all, the Liberty, Equality and Fraternity promoted by the Sillon and often cited by both parties as the underpinnings of democracy is the credo of Freemasonry, and any seeming approval whatsoever of this pernicious system has been repeatedly condemned by numerous popes. Any support for an unworthy candidate should be a restrained and reluctant one, one not openly celebrated on the Internet. It must be viewed as a forced position taken reluctantly to avoid even greater evils.
Conclusion
Those more-or-less forced to vote for such a candidate who is then elected have the right to hold his feet to the fire on crucial issues and insist on upholding campaign promises and working for the moral good of the nation. Trump has claimed that election fraud is being committed on a large-scale basis, and there are reasons for believing that may well be the case. As a reporter I witnessed this first-hand and fought to put an end to it in the community in which I then lived. Trump also has promised to “drain the swamp,” to upend and reform the intelligence agencies and Department of Justice as well as other agencies, a task proposed by President John F. Kennedy that may well have led to his assassination. If this is truly his intent, let him begin with The Central Intelligence Agency, as it is said Kennedy intended to do.
If elected, it should immediately be brought to Trump’s attention that owing to election interference by the CIA, and a proven campaign to wage psychological warfare on Catholics via propaganda and public opinion tools — a campaign that makes the attempt to vilify Trump pale in comparison — an entire Church was destroyed and incalculable harm done to the religious liberty of hundreds of thousands of Catholics, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. As president, proof of this egregious act should be brought out in the open and every attempt should be made to remedy it — by exposing it, giving a voice to those affected by it and making amends to those who suffered such a tragic loss.What is sauce for the goose is sauce also for the gander; the elite should not be the only ones who are able to rectify the wrongs of election interference and its devastating consequences. Let him then live up to his claims as a victim and rectifier of election interference and fraud, a constitutionalist and a champion of religious liberty. Then, perhaps, he could be counted as a more worthy candidate.
“What is described above by Pope St. Pius X, who some say had the gift of foresight, is what Christian conservatives hope to achieve under Trump. And it could well be the foundation laid for a one-world “Christian” church, excluding true Catholics.”
How was this not already accomplished with the Vatican2 apostasy?
If you have read other articles on this site, you will understand that the Novus Ordo was the church of Antichrist, yes, but we still have his system with us. The establishment of the NO was the first step, a spiritual destruction, towards accomplishing that system — a one-world religion as propagated by a one-world government, which is not in evidence yet. The enemy will not rest until all “Christian” religions, also Mohammedanism and Judaism, are considered equal in value. See the article HERE, last page especially. Antichrist’s system must be defeated physically and Rome destroyed before the Second Coming. Cardinal Manning teaches this necessary physical destruction of Rome is the common opinion of theologians.
From an outside reading of various facts and proofs in the alternative media, I think the assassination attempt on Trump was staged, although I could be wrong. Trump is supported by technocrats/transhumans Elon Musk and billionaire Peter Thiel. J.D. Vance, also a Technocrat, has ties to Thiel. I don’t have space to list all the facts mentioned in the media, but Trump, for example, supported the implementation of the 5G system and potentially deadly “vaccines”. And in general, Trump, with all his mannerisms, has always reminded me of the show. Trump is also a political Zionist. And there are even Zionist protestants who don’t support Trump and pointed out that the convention (which I didn’t watch) was concluded with a prayer to a pagan god Waheguru https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jIgthlykaM . Trump is one of the deceptions of these depressing times, because a lot of conservatives outside America also hope for Trump as a savior.
No one should look to any politician as a savior. We have one Savior only!
Did Trump know the vaccines were deadly when he implemented them? Did he force people to take them? Were people duty-bound to do the homework necessary to determine if these vaccines were safe? God gave everyone free will and we cannot blame everything on outside forces. As I said in another comment on this blog, the popes instruct us to vote for the lesser of two evils. All we can do in this election is vote our conscience, and the articles I linked to this blog explain how and why.
Thank you, I agree. I, first of all, blame society for what happened and is happening. Here it is very visible in all areas. I think most were aware of the alternative view on “vaccines” but instead of doing their homework treated the “anti-vaxxers” with derision and contempt.
I had distributed brochures about 5G where there is a special section where it is described that Trump and Gates themselves do not want any 5G radiation in their location. At the same time, he supports it publicly. Therefore, I also have reason to believe he understood or at least sensed the danger of “vaccines”. I think that everything is one there regarding conspiracies.
Dear Theresa,
…Trump said, “It’s going to be the greatest reality show the world has ever seen”.
I’ll wait to see the bullet damage to his ear after the bandages have been removed to see if that liar is telling the truth. I’ve seen many pictures and read and listened to many comments. Most all can be tossed aside imo. The two pictures that stick out to me the most is the one with no blood on his hand and the straight on picture of him down on the platform, behind the podium where he dropped. That podium was to the base of the platform. So how was that ‘straight on’ picture even taken unless someone squeezed in between him and the podium, got down low and took the picture?
…Before Trump shut me down on his “Truth Social” platform for calling him out for killing over 100,000 American’s with his warp speed death jab, I asked him to provide a “traditional” Catholic name in the house, senate or the supreme court?
The truth of the matter is, there are none anywhere to be found. This tells me, we will be the first on their list to be done away with.
It’s all becoming so surreal.
May the Blessed Trinity and Our Lady give us peace and strength.
Having worked as an investigative reporter for 25 years, I know how easily photos and information can be skillfully manipulated by both sides. I actively fought these abuses and exposed them. We cannot know as a certainty who is telling the truth anymore — all we can do is what the POPES have instructed us to do in such cases and that is to choose what appears to us to be the lesser of two evils. No Catholic could ever support a Democrat. Whoever else they choose to support is a matter of conscience.
As for the vaccine business, who knows the real story there, either. No one was forced to take these vaccines. If people did not educate themselves on the dangers and gave in to hysteria and public opinion, then they must take at least part of the responsibility for that. Did Trump act maliciously in seeking to find a vaccine? Only God can answer that question. He does need to address the issue, however.
Please use the search function on this site to read the articles posted on what the popes teach regarding the Jews. LibTrad clergy who were members of secret societies are the ones who blamed “the plot against the Church” on the Jews. This was not the Church’s position. Have they played a part? Certainly. But without the assistance of apostate Catholic and Protestant Freemasons, they could never have succeeded on such a massive scale.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/aMe9NkDiXmGU
As Catholics vote, regardless of the possible deceptions planned by the one we vote for, let us remember the words of Timothy, pray –2 For kings, and for all that are in high station:( President ) that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all piety and chastity. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: …
Also in Volume 2 of Moral and Pastoral Theology, by Fr. Henry Davis,S.J., he states “It is sinful to vote for the enemies of religion or liberty, EXCEPT to exclude a worse candidate”…Fathers McHugh, O.P. and Callan,O.P., tell us in their course on Moral Theology:Per accidens, it is lawful to vote for an unworthy candidate, when this is necessary to prevent a greater evil, as the opposing candidate is much more worse…
To end I say, we vote, then “watch and pray.” (A broken heart and God’s will done, would be better than that God’s will should be avoided)…Thank you Teresa for the heads up on voting during these trying and insane days….Joseph M.
Leo XIII – Immortalale Dei
37. In the same way the Church cannot approve of that liberty which begets a contempt of the most sacred laws of God, and casts off the obedience due to lawful authority, for this is not liberty so much as license, and is most correctly styled by St. Augustine the “liberty of self ruin,” and by the Apostle St. Peter the “cloak of malice.”(23) Indeed, since it is opposed to reason, it is a true slavery, “for whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin.”
41. If in the difficult times in which Our lot is cast, Catholics will give ear to Us, as it behoves them to do, they will readily see what are the duties of each one in matters of opinion as well as action. As regards opinion, whatever the Roman Pontiffs have hitherto taught, or shall hereafter teach, must be held with a firm grasp of mind, and, so often as occasion requires, must be openly professed.
42. Especially with reference to the so-called “liberties” which are so greatly coveted in these days, all must stand by the judgment of the apostolic see, and have the same mind. Let no man be deceived by the honest outward appearance of these liberties, but let each one reflect whence these have had their origin, and by what efforts they are everywhere upheld and promoted. Experience has made Us well acquainted with their results to the State, since everywhere they have borne fruits which the good and wise bitterly deplore. If there really exist anywhere, or if we in imagination conceive, a State, waging wanton and tyrannical war against Christianity, and if we compare with it the modern form of government just described, this latter may seem the more endurable of the two. Yet, undoubtedly, the principles on which such a government is grounded are, as We have said, of a nature which no one can approve.
(my note: this is a prophetic point by LeoXIII, in 1885 before the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, and long before the post WW2 dialectic of communism vs. americanism)
Dear Dave,
Pope Leo XIII, here, is not directly addressing elections, but I understand your concerns. We can draw a comparison from the following.
According to the opinions of seven notable theologians, in withdrawing from the “obedience” of a man claiming to be pope who you believe was never canonically elected, no schism is involved. Vermeersch-Cruesen, Reiffenstuel, Schmalzgrueber, Ferraris, Vechiotti and Szal state: “There is no schism involved… if one refuses obedience [to a pope] inasmuch as one suspects the person of the Pope or the validity of his election…” (The Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, Rev. Ignatius J. Szal, A.B., J.C.L.).
This fulfills the provisions of Can. 20 and establishes probability according to Church teaching. These theologians agree that one need only suspect that the man claiming to be Pope is irregular in some way or invalidly elected (Can. 2200), and we have established far more than just suspicion in the documents presented on this subject. For as St. Robert Bellarmine teaches, a doubtful pope is no pope. The opinion of these men and the proofs that the 1958 election was invalid also constitutes the juridical certainty in way of evidence required by Dom Charles Augustine under Can. 430. What Szal presents, then, is a solidly probable opinion, one which helps establish certitude, and according to the laws and teachings of the Church it may be followed at will.
What does this tell us? That if this can be applied to a pope, then how much more so a secular election? If we absolutely cannot bring ourselves to vote for an unworthy candidate because we doubt our votes will be counted, meaning the election would be invalid, or because we cannot in good conscience support one we believe to be intrinsically evil, then we have no choice but to follow our conscience. And in the absence of confessors, no one may judge a person for doing so. It is not something I recommend, based on what the popes teach, but it is something that is between God and the individual.
Thank you for commenting!