Mexico, Mass Migration, and the Example of Moses Part VI: Rome and the Enormous Lies of Exsul Familia
This week we continue our look at Exsul Familia, Pope Pius XII's 1952 apostolic constitution which has been called "The Church's Magna Charta for Migrants." This exposition was inspired by the recent remarks of then Mexican presidential candidate, and now president elect of Mexico, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who, during his presidential campaign, promised to defend the right of every person in North America, indeed, every person in the world, to migrate to the United States.
Lopez Obrador's comment struck at least one writer as not only a slightly bizarre campaign promise, but an actual invasion threat toward a neighboring sovereign state.
But as strange as Lopez Obrador's comments were, he didn't arrive at his statements on his own. Rather, his belief that everyone has a right to migrate to the United States, regardless of the cost to American taxpayers, is one implication of the Roman Church-State's doctrine of immigration, migration and refugee resettlement as set forth most completely in the afore mentioned apostolic constitution Exsul Familia.
Thus far, we've looked at what an apostolic constitution is - according to a number of Roman Catholic source, apostolic constitutions are the most authoritative of all papal documents, outranking even papal encyclicals in importance - and have begun to examine the erroneous foundational economic doctrine that undergirds all of the Roman Church-State's claims that mass, taxpayer funded immigration, migration, and refugee resettlement are consistent with Christian teaching. That doctrine is called the universal destination of goods. The universal destination of goods holds that when God created the world, he gave it to humanity in common, that is to say, collectively. In other words, Rome believes in original communism.
But God did not give the Earth the men to men corporately. As John Robbins notes, "God, holding ultimate ownership of the Earth, gave it to men severally, not collectively. The argument for this may be found in the words of the seventeenth-century Christian thinker, Robert Filmer" (Ronald Sider - Contra Deum). Contrary to Rome, the original economic order was not communism, but private property. To put it another way, the Bible teaches original capitalism. Lord willing, I shall present a more complete case for this in a future installment. Readers who admire the work of John Robbins, as does this author, will be interested to know the basis for my argument for original capitalism is Dr. Robbins 1973 doctoral dissertation, The Political Thought of Sir Robert Filmer.
But for this week's installment, I would like to show another implication of Rome's evil doctrine of the universal destination of goods, tyrannical world government.
The Universal Destination of Goods, the Destruction of National Sovereignty, and Institution of World Government
As we noted in Part 4 of this series, the doctrine of the universal destination of goods holds that need, not possession, is the ultimate and only moral title to property. One of the implications of this teaching is the welfare state, and it should come as no surprise that prelates of the Roman Church-State have been long been among the most ardent proponents of socialism and are largely responsible for the erection of the enormously expensive welfare bureaucracies imposed upon the formerly free nations of the West.
But Rome isn't satisfied merely with setting up welfare state tyrannies in individual nations. No, Rome's program of socialism is a scalable tyranny. Rome's intends to use citizens of the wealthy nations of the West as tax donkeys to pay welfare benefits, not just to the native poor of their own nations, but to foreign migrants as well.
It is my contention that Rome intends to use these welfare migrants as a means to disrupt the societies into which they come, socially, politically and economically with the ultimate goal of making them ungovernable and thus easily folded into a system of world government headed by the Roman Church-State and her Antichrist popes.
For proof of this, let's turn to Pope Pius XII's words in Exsul Familia. He wrote,
You know indeed how preoccupied we have been and with what anxiety we have followed those who have been forced by revolutions in their own countries, or by unemployment or hunger to leave their homes and live in foreign lands.
The natural law itself, no less than devotion to humanity, urges that ways of migration be opened to these people. For the Creator of the universe made all good things primarily for the good of all [n.b. this is the universal destination of goods]. Since land everywhere offers the possibility of supporting a large number of people, the sovereignty of the State, although it must be respected, cannot be exaggerated to the point that access to this land is, for inadequate reasons, denied to needy [n.b. need is explicitly cited as the basis for Rome's migration policy] and decent people from other nations, provided of course, that the public wealth, considered very carefully, does not forbid this (emphasis mine).
Note well the implied globalism in this statement. Rome claims that the sovereignty of the state must be respected, but that it, "cannot be exaggerated to the point," that needy migrants are denied access to the resources of its people. But who decides whether a nation state is exaggerating its sovereignty or not? Though not explicitly stated here, in the eyes of Rome the pope is the ultimate decider.
When one speaks of Rome's desire for world dominion, he runs the risk of being labeled a conspiracy theorist. But while Rome's thirst to rule the world is a conspiracy, it's an open one, and perhaps the world's worst kept secret. In fact, it's really not a secret at all. The pope's have grown so bold in recent decades that they explicitly and very publically call for it.
Guadium et Spes, one of the major documents of Vatican II reads,
it is our clear duty, therefore, to strain every muscle in working for the time when all war can be completely outlawed by international consent. This goal undoubtedly requires the establishment of a universal public authority acknowledged as such by all and endowed with the power to safeguard on the behalf of all, security, regard for justice, and respect for rights (quoted in Robbins, Ecclesiastical Megalomania, 187).
More recently, the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace released a document titled Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of Global Public Authority. As Reuters reports,
The Vatican called on Monday for sweeping reforms of the world economy and the creation of an ethical, global authority to regulate financial markets...
The Vatican called for the establishment of "a supranational authority" with worldwide scope and "universal jurisdiction" to guide economic policies and decisions.
Such an authority should start with the United Nations as its reference point but later become independent and be endowed with the power to see to it that developed countries were not allowed to wield "excessive power over the weaker countries"...
One section of the document explained why the Vatican felt the reform of the global economy was necessary and called for specific reforms such as taxation of financial transactions...
"In fact, one can see an emerging requirement for a body that will carry out the functions of a kind of 'central world bank' that regulates the flow and system of monetary exchanges similar to the national central banks"...
"Of course, this transformation will be made at the cost of a gradual, balanced transfer of part of each nation's powers to a world authority and regional authorities..."
This naturally raises the question, So just who will be in charge of this "supranational authority" with worldwide scope and "universal jurisdiction," not to mention who will run the "central world bank"?
Again, the papal document doesn't come right out and say so, but given that the statements are coming from the Vatican, there can be no doubt but that the Church has in mind the popes of Rome. Consider, if you will, the symbolism of the papal tiara.
As the Vatican itself acknowledges, "The Triregnum (the Papal Tiara formed by three crowns)" symbolizes "the triple power of the Pope: father of kings, governor of the world and Vicar of Christ." Apart from any other argument or statement, the arrogant claims of the popes of Rome as symbolized by the tiara ought to be enough to remove all doubt about who Rome sees as controlling the envisioned apparatus of world government.
Rome's hatred of sovereign nations that do not bow to the pope can be traced at least as far back as the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. This treaty established what has come to be known as the Westphalian World Order, an international system in which national governments were the highest level of civil authority. "The Westphalian peace...relied on a system of independent states refraining from interference in each other's domestic affairs and checking each other's ambitions through a general equilibrium of power...[E]ach state was assigned the attribute of sovereign power over its territory. Each would acknowledge the domestic structures and religious vocations of its fellow states as realities and refrain from challenging their existence" (Henry Kissinger, World Order, 3). One could say that the Westphalian World Order was the application of the Biblical principle of MYOB (Mind Your Own Business) to international politics (see 2 Thessalonians 3:11, 12).
Of course, this is antithetical to the teaching of Rome, which holds that the pope is the "father of kings and governor of the world." Rome's reaction to the Treaty of Westphalia is instructive on this point.
In his papal bull Zelo Domus Dei, Pope Innocent the X raged against the articles of the Treaty of Westphalia, calling them, "null, void, invalid, iniquitous, unjust, damnable, reprobate, inane, empty of meaning and effect for all time." Given Rome's severe and historic case of ecclesiastical megalomania, such a statement should come as no surprise.
That said, it probably does come as a surprise to most 21st century Protestants, who have been taught from their youth up that the pope is a brother in Christ, that he is their friend, and that he is a fellow soldier in the culture war. All this is an enormous lie.
In truth, in the pope's raging one hears the voice of Antichrist. It is the voice of the little horn of Daniel which speaks pompous words and makes war against the saints of God, prevailing against them.
The popes of Rome are megalomaniacal James Bond villains in clerical garb. They have never given up their desire to rule the world. And, as Revelation teaches, they temporarily will succeed in doing so. One of the ways the popes aim to effect this world wide rule is through mass, taxpayer funded immigration, migration, and refugee resettlement.
Antichrist has laid out his program for world domination in very clear language in numerous papal documents. Mass, taxpayer funded migration, immigration, and refugee resettlement is one of Rome's principle tools for effecting this outcome. The program outlined in the apostolic constitution Exsul Familia has, by admission of the editor of Rome's official commentary on the document, "enormous financial implications." More to the point, Rome's doctrine of migration, if followed to its full extent, will result in the financial bankruptcy of the host nations.
But in addition to financial implications, Rome's program also has significant political implications. When Rome calls for millions upon millions of migrants, refugees and immigrants - people who have no knowledge of the doctrine of Justification by Belief Alone on which those societies are built and thus no knowledge of the economic and political implications of that doctrine, namely, free markets and limited government - to flood the formerly Protestant nations of the West, the effect is to Romanize those nations and to prepare them to be folded into Rome's planned system of "supranational authority" with worldwide scope and "universal jurisdiction," with the effect that, no one will be able to buy or sell except one who has the mark or name of the beast, or the number of his name.
When popes of Rome speak of respecting national sovereignty, they lie and enormous lie. The only sovereignty they respect is that of their own pretended authority.