Tag Archives: institution of marriage

A Manifesto of Christian Resistance

Against perverse and unnatural forms of Marriage

BN-GF228_galsto_P_20141230132525

TO BE READ FROM ALL THE PULPITS OF AMERICA

I, as a disciple of Christ Jesus, hold and believe that the U.S. Supreme Court has no authority to impose Sodom upon America in name of the U.S. Constitution; and that such a judgement would be null and void. For the institution of marriage, which originates with the Creator of Man, falls under His Authority alone, and it can no more be changed by a government of men, than the nature of man could be changed by a government of men.

Therefore, no State or Federal officer, representative, or official could justly — either according to the Divine, moral, or natural law — enforce such a Court decision.  Nor would anyone be obliged to obey them if they were to command that such laws or
decisions be observed.

For these reasons, all men and women of good will have the right and liberty to refuse compliance to such a court decision and to insist upon the liberty of nature itself against the tyranny implied in the same: the tyranny of a new and perverse gnosticism which asserts that human liberty can be in defense of the perversion of nature, or that human dignity can be founded upon ignominy.

I further hold that against such a court order, all men and women have the natural right to self-defense against its imposition, observance, recognition or toleration.

For I hold that a government, even elected by the people, which seeks to observe and/or impose or even to acquiesce to such a court order, looses its legitimacy in the sight of Nature and Nature’s God, since in doing so, it would not so much be a government of men, as the absence of government: a chaotic mass of tyrannical authority at war with Nature itself.

Finally, I hold and protest against such a government, that all men, who seek to restore the Natural order, have, in the face of the persecution of themselves and their fellows — when all peaceful forms of resistance, petition and reform are obstructed — the right to take up arms to protect and ensure their own liberty, so that they might live in harmony with Nature and the Author and Creator of Nature. For this right, is not only the right of the Christian, but is inherent in Nature itself, since it is nothing more than the right to self-defense:  of Nature, on behalf of the Author of Nature.

For, indeed, it is the birth-right of every Christian to defend himself, his family, his possessions and his society, from that indignity and offense of the Divine Majesty which is inherent in every and any denial of that order of the human family, which is constituted by natural marriage: in which there are mutually pledged one man and one woman in a sacred bond of fidelity for the procreation and upbringing of a new generation of children.  For the violation of this institution by the perversion of Sodom, without a doubt, cries out to God for vengeance:  a vengeance which not only those, who promote such sins, justly merit from Him, but also those who tolerate such; a vengeance which they all must endure from Nature herself, when she avenges the enemies of her God, Creator and Author, by the calamity and turmoil of special and tremendous dispensations.

Let all men, therefore, know and heed, this manifesto of Christian conscience and hearken to the truths and rights which it declares, for the honor and glory of God and the defense of the United States of America.  And let them not so much trouble themselves and tremble before the men who profess it, but fear and cower beneath the Majesty and Authority of God the Creator, the Judge of the living and the dead, Which it acknowledges.

 

The Court hath no power over Marriage

God, the Creator
God, the Creator, Author of Man

Rome, March 11, 2015: The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has announced in January that it will hear a case regarding a dispute in which the question of the “right” of individuals to obtain marriage licenses, regardless of their gender, arises.

The US media and indeed many commentators have been presenting the news in an exceedingly erroneous manner: they are saying that the decision is already certain or that the Court will use its judgement wisely, but none dare to touch upon the truth of the matter, namely that,

The Court hath no power over Marriage

It is a truth of nature and of Divine Law, that no court has authority over the institution of Marriage. This truth is taught implicitly by Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical, Libertas, n. 10, when he writes (bold-facing added):

10. From this it is manifest that the eternal law of God is the sole standard and rule of human liberty, not only in each individual man, but also in the community and civil society which men constitute when united. Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man doing what he pleases, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the State; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law. Likewise, the liberty of those who are in authority does not consist in the power to lay unreasonable and capricious commands upon their subjects, which would equally be criminal and would lead to the ruin of the commonwealth; but the binding force of human laws is in this, that they are to be regarded as applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning anything which is not contained in the eternal law, as in the principle of all law. Thus, St. Augustine most wisely says: “I think that you can see, at the same time, that there is nothing just and lawful in that temporal law, unless what men have gathered from this eternal law.”(5) If, then, by anyone in authority, something be sanctioned out of conformity with the principles of right reason, and consequently hurtful to the commonwealth, such an enactment can have no binding force of law, as being no rule of justice, but certain to lead men away from that good which is the very end of civil society.

Thus, because marriage, which is an institution of nature, takes precedence to the state in both time and causation.  Hence, just as no state can exist unless there first be marriage, since every state is a society of men, and there cannot be a state without marriage.

Again, because God made made unto His image and likeness and He made them male and female, He also established that with the union of 1 man and 1 woman, their bond of fidelity remain unbroken throughout life. This truth is evidenced in the rational nature of man as much as in the physical nature of man.  For, the proper development of the individual requires that he have 1 father and 1 mother, that his father be a male and that his mother be a woman; and that the two of them give him undivided and stable commitments in being his father and his mother, in unity, harmony and love.

And just as the violation of any of these characteristics of a marriage breaks down the family, so, just as the family is the fundamental building block of human society, the violation of any of these breaks down the state or impedes it all together.

Thus no court of men has any power over marriage, since “to have power over” means to have the authority over an institution.  Since man does not have authority over institutions which have not arisen from human authority, courts of men must look to the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, the Creator, to know beforehand the unpassible limits and constraints which He has placed upon marriage.

Hence, a court which attacks marriage, attacks the state.  And,

A Court which attacks the State is at war with the people

Hence it is a high crime and act of treason, for any human court to rule against the nature or duties of the institution of marriage.  Such a court cannot define anything, but can only rule validly in law when it accepts AND recognizes the institution of marriage for what it is, as arising from the very nature of man as God his creator has established him in body and soul.

A court which attacks marriage, in attacking the state, is at war with the people. The citizens of any such state have thus the natural right and divine duty to arrest such judges and imprison them.  Their crime is a capital one and citizens can lawfully by natural right put such justices to trial for a capital crime, even if there are no existing laws for such such a penalty, because such a penalty for such a crime is derived immediately from the Natural Law which requires no human positive law to be enacted.

Thus, when such a court attempts such a crime, the bond of allegiance of the people is without a doubt severed toward such a court, and its decisions can and ought to be rejected.  Any human government or state which attempts to impose such a judgement upon the people, itself enters into a state of war with its citizens.  Henceforth, they can lawfully omit all allegiance to such a state, whether as regards the payment of taxes, the levy of troops, the enforcement or obedience of laws, but only if and to the extent that they seek to establish anew a more just order and a state or government or laws which are more harmonious with the natural law and divine right.

These words might sound extreme, but they are no lest extreme than the crime committed by such a court in such an affair of men.