By Rejecting Christ as King, Mas has Created Hell on Earth

[Stone]

From the Archived Catacombs:

Thank you to Erich who posted these perceptive words in the comment section below the video:  "It seems to me that man, by rejecting Christ as King, has created hell on earth"

Right principles vs Rights of man

[11:30] Fr. Denis Fahey explains Catholic action: What is Catholic action that we Catholics are supposed to be doing especially the lay people?

While not engaging in party politics, in America we wouldn't be pushing for democrat or republican, but Catholic action aims at what?   It aims at preparing men to act as good politicians to work for the common good according to right principles.   It seeks them to prepare the consciences of citizens politically and equip them also as Christians and Catholics.   In other words Catholic action is to prepare and educate the population towards the Kingship of Jesus Christ.


[18:00 min.] Fr. Hewko: “Be reminded this Declaration of the Rights of Man was put out in 1793 and it was condemned by the Church.”

Excerpt from Fr. Fahey's book The Social Rights of Jesus Christ the King
pg. 138-140

...Him is such a horrible and mad crime as to be scarcely credible.  For He is the origin and source of all good and just as mankind could not be freed from slavery but by the sacrifice of Christ, so neither can it be preserved but by His power”. (same Enclyclical Letter, Tametsi, 1900).  When a people which has grasped the truth of the Divine Plan turns against our Lord, by leaving Him out of account and by passing over in silence the rights of the Head of the Mystical Body, it commits apostasy and initiates the most fightful disorder.  Having rejected the dependence of mankind on the Sacred Humanity of Jesus, man must necessarily put himself and his own natural life in the place of God.  Now it is precisely in this that Rationalism consists and this is exactly what we find in the “Declaration of the Right of Man” of 1789.  We behold, on the one hand, social apostasy and the rejection of our Lord Jesus Christ, on the other, the substitution of man for God or the worship of humanity. (1)

The Preamble to this infamous document runs as follows: “The representatives of The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of 1791 and of 1793, made explicit certain points implicitly contained in that of 1789.

...the French people met together in a national assemble, considering that the ignorance, forgetfulness or contempt of the rights of man are the sole causes of public misfortunes and of the corruption of governments, have decided to set forth, in a solemn Delcaration, the natural, inalienable and sacred rights of man, so that this Declaration, being ever before the eyes of all the membrs of society, may unceasingly remind them of their rights and duties….

“Consequently, the National Assembly recognises and declares, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supremem Being, the following rights of man and the citizen.

“Art. I.  Men are born free and equal in rights and continue so. Social distinction can be founded only on public utility….

“Art III. The source of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No society,no individual, can exercise an authority which does not emanate from it expressly.

“Art IV. Liberty is the power of doing what we will, so long as it does not injure another: The only limits of each man’s natural rights are such as secure the same rights to others; these limits are determinable only by law.

“Art. VI. The law is the Expression of the general will……..

“Art X. No one can be molested for his opinion, even for his religious opinions, provided their manifestation does not trouble the public order established by law.

“Art XI.  The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man; therefore every citizen is allowed freedom of speech, of writing, and of printing, but will have to answer for any abuse of that liberty in cases determined by law.”

Only a few of the articles of the Declaration are quoted.  They will, however, be quite sufficient to illustrate the Rousseauist-Masonic doctrine of the immanent divinity of man which underlies the whole document.  Of course there is a certain vagueness about some of the formulae.  This is a well-known Masonic trick to deceive the unwary. 

For example, the uninitiated interpret the first article as follows: Men are free, that is, they can do what the law does not forbid:  they may even profess the religion which pleases the; men are equal in rights, that is, all are equal before the law, all are eligible for public offices, all are subject to public duties, to taxes, etc.  But the real meaning, the one behind which is the whole driving force of masonry and secret societies generally, is that each man in the sate of nature, to which we must return to be happy, is free and independent like God.   All are equally God. Man is born free; that is, unrestrained license is an absolute exigency of human nature; any kind of submission to any man is contrary to nature. As all are equally God, nature demands tht the strictest equality should be realised amongst men, and that, therefore, everyone should have a vote. Accordingly, in a State correctly formed, an absolute social equality should counterbalance natural inequalities. Needless to say the logical consequence is Communism. For if all men are equal, why are some rich and others poor? The right of private property is the greatest cause of social inequality, so it must be abolished.Other distinctions must disappear as well. If all men are equal, the classifications of superiors and inferiors, parents and children, husbands and wives must be eliminated.