A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics

The 200 year leftist de-construction of Mexico January 22, 2013

I’ve been reading the book Blood Drenched Altars by Bishop Francis Kelley. Written shortly after the accord between the Vatican and the nightmarish fascist/socialist government of Plutarco Elias Calles which ended the Cristero Rebellion (and subsequently led to Calles reneging on the amnesty and killing tens of thousands of Cristeros), it’s an amazing book. Not amazingly well written – in fact, it’s rather poorly written and at times hard to follow. But for all that, the information conveyed is incredible, if for no other fact than it is so little known even in the United States, Mexico’s tormenting neighbor.

Mexico is a state where the horrific ideals of the French Revolution have been more institutionalized in the government than anywhere else on this continent.  For almost 200 years, ever since radicals eager for plunder and a continuation of the failed French “experiment” ripped Mexico away from Spain, the government of Mexico has been dominated by far left ideologues and, more harmfully, convinced Masons.  Bishop Kelly takes a good deal of time to point out that there are very different varieties of masonry.  While those of England and English-descended countries tend to be very mild and rather ecumenical, if still indifferentist, those descended from France, Italy, and Spain tend to be extremely radical and thoroughly, violently anti-Catholic.  That is the type of Mason Mexico has been stricken with for nearly 200 years.  A small cabal of Masons – which included the worst persecutors of the Church: Calles, Carranza, Obregon, Villa, et. al. – has dominated the highest echelons of Mexican governance essentially since independence.

Worse still, in addition to being masons and having a demonic hatred for the Church, which was especially evidenced in the 1917 “constitution” and the governments that followed, the small cabal of hooligans that dominated Mexico from the 1820s up until today (they hide it much better today) are thorough-going leftists, whose policies have broken what was once the most culturally advanced nation in the western hemisphere and left it a third-world nation which is constantly dependent on the United States for its general welfare.  Along the way, the leftists dominating Mexico’s government have been aided and abetted by the government of the United States, which has always sought to keep Mexico weak and easily controllable.  Mission accomplished.

Of course, the very worst period of persecution was from 1917-1945, roughly, after a “Constitution” approved only by the cabal of leftists themselves (there was no free vote over the Mexican constitution, as there was in the United States in the late 1780s) put in place all the provisions necessary to crush the Church.  Calles was the very worst of a very bad bunch.  He and his red cohort – for he was the most completely communist president in Mexico’s sad history – actually put in loyalty oaths for teachers in state-run schools (more later) which required them to solemnly swear (not to God – to whom?  satan?) that they would do all in their power to crush the Church and destroy the “fanatacism” of the 97% of Mexico that was practicing Catholic.

About that huge percentage of Catholics – why did they not revolt, or revolt more effectively?  Even though the vast majority of Mexicans at that time hated the government, Mexicans as a whole were not much inclined to revolution.  They just wanted to live their lives in peace and worship their God.  And, the Church in Mexico was always very much on the side of never giving into violence, no matter how dire the provocation – I think that goes back to the heavy Franciscan influence in Mexico.  During the Cristero rebellion, the Church leadership was very divided – some supported the revolt as necessary to stop the horrific persecution, but many others – probably the majority – were opposed, and eventually negotiated the deal that was supposed to end the worst aspects of the persecution.  Of course, the Mexican government, being lying leftists, reneged on that deal, so that by the mid 1930s the number of active priests in Mexico had fallen by over 90% and many states, like Tabasco and Yucatan, had no priests at all. There were other reasons – the fact that the US government invariably sided with the most extreme radicals (supposedly, to support “democracy”) and denied arms shipments to any but them, even going so far as to institute blockades to keep weapons and ammo out of the hands of the vast majority of the people – , the general lack of organization, education, and communication among the great mass of people, which kept them ignorant as to what was going on – there were many reasons.  But int the end, much of seemed to come down to a certain passivity and sense of futility that seemed to dominate the masses of Mexico, especially that huge number descended from the native population – “indians.” They simply did not have that Anglo-Saxon outrage at injustice – they just did the best they could under the circumstances.

Mexico in 1810 was probably the most well developed country in the western hemisphere. Three centuries of Spanish rule had generally been very beneficial, overall.  Almost the entire population were faithful, practicing Catholics, the Church operated schools in virtually every parish, and even tiny villages had a parish, there were colleges and universities in the larger towns, most all of which was free to the mass of peasants that made up the population at that time.  The quality of Mexico’s universities was superb, much higher than existed in the US at the time, and there were all manner of scientific research and advancements.  In addition,  in the liberal arts of language, history, philosophy, and the sacred science of theology, Mexico in 1810 was, in some respects, equal to the most advanced nations of Europe.  Economically, Mexico had been growing very rapidly for over a century by 1810, was totally self-sufficient in most areas, had large exports or raw and finished material, and was rapidly making the first steps towards the same industrialization occurring in Europe.  If Mexico had stayed on that course, with the very gentle hand of the Church generally guiding and shaping the culture and the people, Mexico – which at that time included most of what is now the western US – could have been the great power in North America, or at least the equal of the United States.  That, of course, would not do.

So, it was all smashed.  The state of Mexico has never, even to this day, fully replaced all the educational institutions stolen from the Church, looted for quick gain by political cronies, then left abandoned.  Bishop Kelly toured through Mexico extensively and reported seeing what had been great univesities with very advanced science labs empty, burned, and abandoned.  Gorgeous architectural works, churches, schools, etc, were ruined or left to decay and collapse because they had been founded and/or operated by the Church.  The only real care for the poor and indigent, the aged and infirm, came from the Church – that was all destroyed.  For decades, Mexico had essentially no such services for those most in need, because the government never had money.  It should have, but the wealth of generous souls transferred to the Church over centuries to build hospitals and orphanages was squandered in payoffs to members of the political cabal and disappeared, never to return.  Such an immensity of wealth was squandered that Mexico quickly fell from the first tier of nations to being an undeveloped, broke, ruined backwater by the latter half of the 19th century.  Can you see why I love leftism so?

Even today, the suffering continues.  I have spent a good deal of time reading blogs and news sites that cover the narco-war in Mexico.  Many sites, especially those in Spanish that are utterly ignored by our media, provide copious evidence that the horrific drug war ongoing in poor Mexico has been stirred up by the PRI – the “Institutional Revolutionary Party”, the party of Carranza and Calles and Gil and Obregon, the worst demons of Mexico’s heart-breaking history – in order to attack and discredit their main competitor, the PAN, or National Action Party.  PAN is no great shakes, itself, as most all major Mexican politicans are either masons, leftists, corrupt, or all three. But it was less hostile to the Church – under PAN, the ban against wearing clerics in public was rescinded, along with a few other minor restrictions. But even today, the Church in Mexico has almost no rights – there can be no Catholic newspapers or magazines, whether owned by the Church or not, no Catholic broadcasting (thus, the reason for EWTN shortwave), and there are tight controls on any public role for the Church outside worship.  It is possible, although I don’t know for certain, that PRI and PAN are just modern incarnations of the old leftist fight between two competing brands of radical masonry – the Scottish Rite and the York Rite (again, the Mexican masons are far different from American ones), which fight drove many of the “revolutions” in Mexico from 1820-1920. But nevertheless, it is known in Mexico that PRI is very close to several drug cartels, that PRI receives large “donations” from the cartels, and that the effort by PAN to fight the cartels and the violent reaction from them had a great deal to do with politics.  As usual, the US appears to be involved, with many reports indicating the US is supporting the PRI-backed Sinaloa cartel in an effort to crush all rivals.

Oh, one final aside: we see in our parishes today a great deal of things “Aztec.”  “Aztec dancers” feature at many parish events, especially in parishes with large Hispanic populations. We are told, this is because Mexicans and Hispanics in general want to honor their heritage.  But in point of fact, there was no adulation of the satanic Aztec empire in Mexico from its (blessed) destruction in 1521 until the 1920s.  At that point in time, seeking to find an alternative source of reverence and cultural attachment for the people, Calles and his co-revolutionaries resurrected the cult of Aztec as a distraction for the people.  It was done in a very clever way, which Bishop Kelly briefly discusses in his book, but the main point is, this is an astroturf movement. Not today, but in its history, it certainly was.

Reading the history of Mexico is as sad and sordid a tale as can be read. Only the general destruction of the traditional practice of the Faith worldwide since Vatican II makes for sadder reading. Mexico was a land of great promise.  More importantly, it was a land of immense faith.  It is not nearly so today.  Yes, many Mexicans still practice the Catholic religion, but it is often a deformed, twisted, secularized and worldly version of the Faith.  It is not the faith that produced so many thousands of martyrs.  Worse still, the history of example of Mexico should be a warning for us in this country.  The same elements that so badly disfigured Mexico are at work in the United States.  And we must understand that even the very fabric of this country, it’s orientation as a secular democratic republic, is conducive to the kind of persecution which developed in Mexico.

I highly recommend the book, even though Bishop Kelly’s prose is uneven and he at times assumes we know things we don’t – it was a book written for his contemporary audience in 1935, an audience which apparently knew quite a bit of what was ongoing in Mexico.  You should definitely check it out.

Via the great Transalpine Redemptorists, here is a bit of history of one Mexican martyr: