Geoffrey responds to an inane e-mail:
(for the e-mail itself, scroll to the bottom)


----BEGIN SATURDAY RANT----

The first thing I think is that the trend towards eliminating the residual, overtly Christian elements from government is the logical and inevitable result of our particular nation's revolutionary origins which, in turn, have their own origins in the perennial rebellion against the Divine authority represented by God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Church, and the Pope.  Other examples of heresies [Gr. hairesis "choice"] contributing to the failure of the West to maintain its cultural and ethnic integrity include: Protestantism, Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, Liberalism, Socialism and Communism, Feminism and militant ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, Multiculturalism, and Modernism, which was identified by Pope St. Pius X as " the synthesis of all heresies".

However, these are derivatives.  They are not the primary cause.  The cause is religious.  We are in a religious war and have been for the last 2,000 years.

J.R.R. Tolkien's (now) well-known work The Lord of the Rings is considered to be the best-selling and most widely-read book of all time after Sacred Scripture (i.e., the Holy Bible) itself.  What many people who are familiar with Tolkien do not appreciate is that he was a devoted English monarchist (!)  and a devout, traditional Roman Catholic (!!!) with a keen appreciation of the history of western civilisation and the fallen nature of Mankind.

That is to say, he believed in such antiquated and reactionary concepts as the Throne, the Altar, and Original Sin.  I will hazard a guess and suggest that most of his readers do not.

Anyhow, in a separate but related work (The Silmarillion), Tolkien wrote "Those who will defend authority against rebellion must not themselves rebel."  This simple statement, more than any other single sentence is, in my opinion, the key to understanding the history of western civilisation since the Crucifixion -- and indeed all of history since the War in Heaven -- as Mankind has been in a state of rebellion since Adam and Eve defied God in the Garden of Eden.

God ordained a natural, hierarchial order to the world, applicable equally to both the pre-Christian and the Christian eras.  The divine aspect became more focused, humanly speaking, in the Christian era with the founding of Our Lord's Church and the unifying impact this had on western civilisation.  This natural order, this hierarchy ordained by God and sanctified by His Church, is authoritarian and patrist; in other words, it is neither egalitarian nor is it democratic.  (Feminists like to pretend that the prehistorical era was matriarchal.  That this mythical, matriarchal prehistorical era left no evidence of its own existence appears not to matter much to them.)  Therefore, by logical extension, the natural order is anti-Liberal, anti-Socialist, and anti-Feminist.  It places primacy on the family (a family being defined as a man, his wife, and their children [ his and their being possessive pronouns]) and, again by logical extension, larger kinship groups such as extended families, clans, tribes, nations, and races.

Now, the Church (that is to say, the institution founded by God in His incarnation as Our Lord Jesus Christ) -- upon which our civilisation and its hierarchy is based -- demands morality and is therefore intolerant of immorality.  Mankind, because he is given free will by God, is capable of making decisions which may be either moral or not.  I.e., his decisions and actions may be either in accordance with God's will (that is to say, in accordance with what the Church teaches) or against it.  The consequences of being either in accordance with God's will or not are well known to most if not all Christians.

Because of his fallen nature, Mankind is subject to Sin, the chief sin being Pride.  Because of Pride, a large percentage of Mankind does not believe they must act in accordance with God's will, despite the consequences.  Moreover, many Christians today no longer believe in the consequences of going against God's will, namely, judgement at the moment of death and damnation to Hell for all eternity if one dies in a state of mortal sin.

There is a quote from a movie called The Usual Suspects that goes, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist."  How many of your fellow countrymen do you know that really believe in the devil?  Do you really believe in the devil?  Or do you just use the term, if at all, like a superstitious bogey-man?

The problem is this: if you stop believing in the devil, and you stop believing in Sin; stop believing in Sin, and you stop believing in the need for forgiveness.  Stop believing in forgiveness, and you stop believing in the need for someone with the authority to grant that forgiveness ( i.e. a priest).  Stop believing in priests, and you stop believing in the need for the Church.

Stop believing in the Church, and you stop believing in the Holy Ghost and Our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, in God.  Which is exactly what the Enemy wants us to do.

Why is this relevant to this email titled "The Law is the Law"?  Because many if not most Americans (incorrectly) believe in the concept of separation of Church and State, a concept wholly alien to western civilisation until the 20th century.  The First Amendment forbids the establishment of a religion at the national level.  The States, by virtue of the First and Tenth Amendments, may (theoretically and correctly) establish a state religion.

Realise that the religious establishment clause of the First Amendment was a compromise.  One of the problems with the manner in which the federal government of the United States was founded is the fact that, not only was it founded by Protestants (generally speaking; the delegates from Maryland, notwithstanding), but it was founded by Protestants who did not get along with each other; indeed, it was founded by Protestants who hated each other.

That this is the natural result of Protestantism (mutual suspicion becoming intolerance and hatred... esp. of Catholics) is besides the point; the point being that since they couldnt agree on which heretical sect to adopt for the nation (which would've had a much stronger culturally unifying influence than innovative political theories), they agreed to have none.

In other words, the federal government of the United States was specifically intended to be officially, religiously neutral.  The Faith in our country, such as it might have been, was therefore reduced to political irrelevance.  Those Christian religious trappings which remained (which, techically speaking, should not have remained), reflected a "lowest common denominator" approach designed to appeal to, and therefore appear to favour, no one heretical Christian "denomination" in particular.  Thus, we have such expressions as "In God We Trust" on our currency and "One Nation Under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance.

This uneasy, compromise situation might have been able to last longer had Americans remained generally "Christian", as the Supreme Court was able to conclude in its 29 February 1892 ruling in Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S.  But, we have not nor could we really have been expected to; for despite the fact that each successful rebellion attempts to maintain the (new) status quo, every rebellion against authority also carries within it the seeds of the next.

Complicating matters, we have embraced "Multiculturalism" as a tenet of our national identity.  This, of course, means that we no longer have a national identity because "Multiculturalism" is a self-negating concept.  One cannot simultaneously exalt one's culture and its values and demand that those of other cultures assimilate to one's own if both cultures are considered to be equal.

Therefore, whereas once upon a time the terms "American" and "Christian" might have been synonymous on some abstract level, they clearly are no longer synonymous.  There are Jєωιѕн Americans, Islamic Americans, Hindu Americans, Buddhist Americans, pagan Americans, and atheistic Americans... all of whom, by definition, do not believe in the Christian God ( i.e. the Holy Trinity of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost) and none of whom appreciate being forced to celebrate our holy days as such.  The irony is that they are the ones being true to their own identity, while we continue to water ours down.

Since they do not believe in our God -- and if they are indeed entitled, as Americans, to equal protection under the law including respect for their particular "faith" -- then they really should not be obliged to celebrate holidays that honour certain aspects of Our Lord's life, such as His birth or His Crucifixion and Resurrection?  Moreover, if these non-Christians find the invocation of God on our currency to be offensive -- and if they are American citizens "just like the rest of us" -- then, that makes it their currency, too.  Why should they accept and use currency mentioning or honouring God when they do not believe in Him?

So, the problem is not that non-Christians dont want to believe in God or honour Him in any way.  They are simply acting, quite consistently and predictably, in accordance with their own beliefs and exploiting the concept of "Multiculturalism".

The problem is that Christians dont stand up for their own Faith.  To do that, we have to abandon "Multiculturalism".  To do that, we also have to agree on the terms "we" and "us".  And we dont.

The authour points out the apparently hypocritical nature of non-Christians taking advantage of the benefits of retaining certain residual Christian holidays like Christmas and Easter (although Easter is not a federal holiday, and Thanksgiving is not a Christian holiday as the authour seems to imply).  However, he does not explain a proper course of action and, more importantly, why it would be proper.  Most likely, he would be incapable of doing so, because there is no objective standard to which he could appeal for being right except the Faith, and he did not do that.

Instead, by demanding that non-Christians work on holy days in what he most likely considers to be a "Christian" country, he did the exact opposite.  Because all authority derives from God, and because all governments exercise political authority by the grace of God (whether or not they acknowledge the fact), all governments have a positive obligation to defend the Faith.  Demanding that our government work on Christian holy days -- short of a national emergency -- is explicitly anti-Christian.

Moreover, the authour makes an appeal to "democracy" (his "majority of ALL of the American people", whatever that means), as if that were the answer.  What he appears to fail to grasp is that the democratic process itself is permitting the very outrages about which he is complaining!  Democracy is not a timeless principle and demographics (upon which Democracy depends) are against Christians.

Because of the Reformation (and the Eastern Schism), Christians no longer make common cause.  Because we are contracepting and aborting our children, and thereby refusing the gift of Life that comes only from God, non-Christians are simply "out-breeding" us.  We are decapitated, divided, and dwindling.  Even if "the majority" could somehow muster the political will to defend the Faith, once the majority is no longer Christian, Democracy will be no defence for the Christian minority.

What then?

If history shows anything clearly, it shows one thing: God will not be mocked.  God does not force anyone to believe in Him: His Church simply instructs those who will listen as to His rules and the rest is up to us.  It is that simple.  (And I wouldnt listen to anyone complaining about the Crusades or the Inquisition: they are invariably lying.)  God ordained the natural hierarchy and sanctified it with His Church.  We have a choice: adhere to it and live, deny it and die.  Practice the Faith and go to Heaven, deny the Faith and go to Hell.

There is no third option.

There is an old Roman saying that goes, "Sine auctoritate nulla vita" (Without authority there is no life).  We can choose -- as individuals, families, and as a society -- to obey the authority of God... or not.  Sadly, because we are enamoured of our own abilities and convinced of our own superiority -- even over God -- we more often than not choose unwisely, with catastrophic results to societies, families, and individuals alike.

I dont claim infallibility or perfection; I am just as guilty as the next man.  The key is to recognise our admit our weaknesses, confess our sins, and correct our behaviour.

We Men of the West have, increasingly, been removing God and the general concept of Divine authority from our lives since the Reformation.  It is any wonder that we now have numerous peoples who dwell among us who do not believe in Him and who demand that we remove Him from what is left of our society?  They can do this because it (our society) really isnt ours anymore (maybe it never really was; now there's a thought...) because, again, we refuse to define who we are in precise, exclusionary terms.

That, you see, wouldnt be "Multicultural" and someone might get offended.

God isnt going to argue with Mankind; he'll simply let us go our own way, proudly exercising our Freedom and our Liberty, until we either destroy ourselves or until He's had enough... at which point, those who argue most passionately about the non-existence of God and the irrelevance of adhering to His Commandments and His Church, for their own sake, had better be right.

 

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscuм,

Geoffrey

"I am a patriot, too.  And the best patriot converts his fellow man, so he can go to the heavenly country and be a citizen with the Saints there."
--Fr. Kenneth Lyle Novak, SSPX

PRAYER FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Prayer of St. Augustine (+430)

BEFORE Thine eyes, O Lord, we bring our sins, and we compare them with the stripes we have received.
If we examine the evil we have wrought, what we suffer is little, what we deserve is great.
What we have committed is very grievous, what we have suffered is very slight.
We feel the punishment of sin, yet withdraw not from the obstinacy of sinning.
Under Thy lash our inconstancy is visited, but our sinfulness is not changed.
Our suffering soul is tormented, but our neck is not bent.
Our life groans under sorrow, yet amends not in deed.
If Thou spare us, we correct not our ways: if Thou punish, we cannot endure it.
In time of correction we confess our wrongdoing: after Thy visitation we forget that we have wept.
If Thou strechest forth Thy hand, we promise amendment; if Thou withholdest the sword, we keep not our promise.
If Thou strikest, we cry out for mercy; if Thou sparest, we again provoke Thee to strike.
Here we are before Thee, O Lord, confessedly guilty: we know that unless Thou pardon we shall deservedly perish.
Grant then, O almighty Father, without our deserving it, the pardon we ask; Thou Who madest out of nothing those Who ask Thee.  Through Christ our Lord.  Amen.
V.  Deal not with us, O Lord, according to our sins.
R.  Neither reward us according to our iniquities.

Let us pray.--O God, Who by sin art offended and by penance pacified, mercifully regard the prayers of Thy suppliant people, and turn away the scourges of Thy wrath, which we deserve for our sins.  Through Christ our Lord.  Amen.
 
-----END SATURDAY RANT-----
 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
THE LAW IS THE LAW!
I really love this one
 
This is one of the better e-mails I have received in a long time!
I hope this makes its way around the USA several times over!

So Be It!

THE LAW IS THE LAW

So if the US government determines that it is against the law for the words "under God" to be on our money, then, so be it.

And if that same government decides that the "Ten Commandments" are not to be used in or on a government installation, then, so be it.

I say, "so be it," because I would like to be a law abiding US citizen.

I say, "so be it," because I would like to think that smarter people than I are in positions to make good decisions.

I would like to think that those people have the American public's best interests at heart.
 
BUT, YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE I'D LIKE?

Since we can't pray to God, can't Trust in God and cannot post His Commandments in Government buildings , I don't believe the Government and its employees should participate in the Easter and Christmas celebrations which honor the God that our government is eliminating from many facets of American life .

I'd like my mail delivered on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter. After all, it's just another day.

I'd like the "US Supreme Court to be in session on Christmas, Good Friday, Thanksgiving & Easter as well as Sundays." After all, it's just another day.

I'd like the Senate and the House of Representatives to not have to worry about getting home for the "Christmas Break." After all it's just another day.

I'm thinking that a lot of my taxpayer dollars could be saved, if all government offices & services would work on Christmas, Good Friday & Easter. It shouldn't cost any overtime since those would be just like any other day of the week to a government that is trying to be "politically correct."
 
In fact....

I think that our government should work on Sundays (initially set aside for worshipping God...) because, after all, our government says that it should be just another day ...
What do you all think????

If this idea gets to enough people, maybe our elected officials will stop giving in to the "minority opinions" and begin, once again, to represent the "majority" of ALL of the American people.
SO BE IT...........

Please Dear Lord,
Give us the help needed to keep you in our country!
'Amen' and 'Amen'
Touche!

These are definitely things I never thought about but from now on, I will be sure to question those in government who support these changes.

At the top, it says "I hope this makes its way around the USA several times over!!!!! "
 
Let's see that it does.