MOLOCH SMILES: Women March & Babies Die

MOLOCH SMILES: Women March & Babies Die

TheRemnantvideo
Published on Feb 3, 2018

Michael Matt takes a hard look at the George Soros-backed Women’s March in D.C., New York, London, Rome and all around the world–and asks the question: What are they really protesting and what does it mean for our country and for all of us? What happens if Trump loses in 2020? And what’s with the little reddish hats? Do these not harken back to “les bonnet rouges”–the red “liberty hats” worn by the terrorists who beheaded Catholic France back in 1789? What’s the connection? Why do these women hate us President Trump? Why do they hate pro-lifers? Plus, what does their rabid defense of partial-birth abortion reveal about the end of our civilization?

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2018/02/04/moloch-smiles-women-march-babies-die/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

4 comments on “MOLOCH SMILES: Women March & Babies Die

  1. One of Michael Matt’s best video presentations: emphatic, hard-hitting and prophetic. Kyrie eleison!
    However, I hope he is wrong when he said, “When and if Donald Trump loses in 2020…”

  2. Definitely the best I’ve ever seen from Mr. Matt.
    For some time I’ve had a great deal of respect for his spirit (I don’t say for him, because that would be respect of mere persons).
    I’m convinced that this particular video was inspired by another Spirit, not just his own.

  3. Well, IF civilization does end, the blame will rest squarely on the heads of all but an extremely tiny number of Catholics, clergy, religious and laity alike. Period.

    WE allowed it by doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to EFFECTIVELY PRESERVE AND HAND ON THE TRUTH. The so-called “traditionalist movement” to which most AQ members subscribe is but an easily ignored, statistically insignificant and scattered “effort” to conduct Search & Rescue operations; a necessary “effort” to be sure but nothing more than a holding action, just as Abp. LeFebvre explained in the 1980s.

    That holding action must, of course, be sustained but our “effort”, barring divine intervention, will certainly not wrest some glorious resurrection of militant Catholicism amid a billion baptized Church members, 95% + of whom are indifferent toward, ignorant of or defiant of dogma and living daily in peril of losing salvation altogether.

    Thus, the Revolution of 1962 – 1965 has been exponentially more successful than almost anyone assumes. Vatican II can be viewed, rightly, as a punishment for the failure, since the reign of Pope St. Pius X, by hierarchs, clergy, religious and laity alike to pay more than lip service to what has always been expected by God, since Moses, in discharging every single member of His Church’s duty to Him and Him alone.

    While true that the three successors of St. Pius X were orthodox, truly Catholic and pious, it was also the case that rigorous diligence to protect the priesthood and hierarchy from unsound and heretical infiltrators cannot be given such credit, most significantly after 1938. That men such as Bugnini and Montini were allowed to go on about their respective works of gutting sacred Tradition and introducing the leftist ideologies of Maritain, et al, even under a man as good, godly and outspokenly anti-Communist as was Papa Pacelli, is indicative of how quickly the alarms and safeguards raised by Bl. Pius IX and St. Pius X were bypassed by revolutionary men literally intent on destroying the Church. Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton, a key peritus to Cd. Ottaviani, wrote that since St. Pius X, the Church had seen only more and more “tolerant” popes who, in turn, appointed more and more stupid men as bishops.

    I would argue that once 1958 rolled around, God decided “That’s it! You want what your insane sentiments and evil appetites dictate? Help yourselves!”

    And, as history teaches, when the Church falls into grave laxity, the whole world falls apart.

  4. I hasten to add that my historical criticism of the preconciliar successors of St. Pius X are to be understood as limited only to their respective skills as judges of men they chose to serve in official slots.
    /
    Pope Benedict XV would likely deserve the least criticism insofar as he was tied up with WW One and the disastrous treaties that followed for his entire term of office. Thus, he was not as involved as Pius XI or Pius XII in the “inside politics” of the Vatican.
    /
    Each of the three preconciliar popes left a MOST commendable record of pious contributions to the Church, their own abilities as judges of character notwithstanding.

Leave a Reply