This past Sunday, the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church celebrated the Feast of Christ the King. In his magnificent Encyclical, Quas Primas, by which Pope Pius XI instituted the Feast in 1925, the Holy Father explained his motives for doing so. Among them:
– So that, by the public veneration of the Kingship of Christ, the Kingship of our Savior should be recognized and understood as widely as possible .
– To remind all men and all nations that the Church has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the State.
– To remind the nations of the world that private individuals, rulers, and princes are bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ.
– To call to the mind of rulers and princes that Our Lord’s kingly dignity demands that the State take account of the commandments of God and of Christian principles.
– So that the faithful, by meditating upon these truths, will gain much strength and courage, enabling them to form their lives after the true Christian ideal.
– To call on every Patriarch, Primate, Archbishop, Bishop, and all other Ordinaries in communion with the Apostolic See to whom the Encyclical is addressed, to combat anticlericalism, which is having an evil impact on society by drawing men away from Christ.
– Lastly, to exhort all of the above mentioned men to proclaim our Redeemer’s kingly dignity and power before those leaders of nations who dare to suppress all mention of Christ in their conferences and parliaments.
One notes that the purposes and principles set forth by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas are by no means groundbreaking in nature, rather, they are largely reminders of what the Church has always understood about the Sovereignty of Christ, our duties toward Him, and the extent of His reign.
As for the conciliar church and its liturgy, the Novus Ordo, the celebration of what it calls the Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, also known as the “Thirty-Fourth Sunday of Ordinary Time,” is rather different.
How so?
For one thing, the name.
The title, “King of the Universe,” while undoubtedly applicable to Jesus, has historically been invoked – more often, in fact, almost exclusively so – in reference to the Eternal God from whom Our Redeemer received “all authority in Heaven and on earth” (Mt 28:18) such that “the power of King belongs to Christ as man in the strict and proper sense” (cf Quas Primas 7).
The exact title, “King of the Universe,” is nowhere to be found in the Bible, although its fittingness with respect to both God the Father and His only begotten Son can be derived therefrom.
In Christian usage, the first invocation of the title “King of the Universe” that I could find is in the writings of the fourth century Doctor of the Church, St. Gregory Nazianzen, who employed it in an exegesis of the Old Testament Book of Malachi. He also referred in his writings to the Blessed Virgin Mary as the “Mother of the King of the Universe,” an expression synonymous, of course, with “Mother of God.”
In my own research, I was unable to find any specific references to Christ as “King of the Universe” in the theological or liturgical traditions of either the East or the West, and to the extent that they may exist, one should be careful to examine whether or not the English translation is precise.
For example, some relatively recent texts include the Latin phrase Regem universalem, which is most properly translated as “universal King.” While this may seem synonymous with “King of the Universe,” with regard to the nuances under discussion here, I would argue that this is not necessarily the case.
Consider, for example: The Collect for the Traditional Latin Mass includes the phrase, universórum Rege, which some sources translate as “King of the Universe.” Others, however, render the title “King of all.” My own hand missal (Baronius Press) translates it as “King of the whole world.” One notes as well that it would seem that Rex universi would be the most straightforward way of expressing “King of the Universe” if, in fact, that was the intent.
So, which is more accurate, or perhaps better stated, which translation of universórum Rege most accurately conveys the purpose of the Feast as instituted by Pope Pius XI, namely, to highlight the Social Reign of Jesus Christ and His all-encompassing rule over the affairs of all men and all nations – personally, collectively, politically, etc.
Dr. Michael P. Foley, Professor of Patristics at Baylor University and author of the book “Lost in Translation,” which explores the true meaning of the Latin prayers in the Traditional Roman Rite, writes concerning the phrase universórum Rege:
Used in the plural as it is here, universus can mean either “the whole word” or “all men”, and thus has more of a social or political connotation than a cosmic one.
Dr. Foley’s point is well taken. On a very basic level, one need not be a Latinist to understand his reasoning.
Moreover, the phrase “King of the Universe,” while necessarily inclusive of this world, tends to evoke images of the unseen, purely spiritual God of the Old Testament, the sense in which the title was invoked by St. Gregory Nazianzen as mentioned above.
Christ the King as invoked in Catholic tradition, by contrast, has always been, and can only be, understood to refer to God incarnate (true God and true man), crucified and risen in glory, He who has dominion over all men and all things, both temporal and spiritual.
Missing from the title King of the Universe is any sense that Our Savior’s “kingdom” refers to something more well defined than just a generic realm. As Pope Pius XI plainly stated, however, “the Holy Catholic Church is the Kingdom of Christ on earth, and she is destined to be spread among all men and all nations,” (cf Quas Primas 12).
Also lost is the reality that it is through this Church that the King reigns in the here and now, on earth, in all of the ways already mentioned.
Does the Novus Ordo Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe convey the same?
The answer is no, it does not, and here is the key point: This is by design.
Now, this is not to say that the social dimension of Christ’s Kingship is utterly missing from that liturgy altogether, but only that the liturgical reformers (aka, destroyers) intended to downplay it.
Dr. Foley, in a separate article, cites Fr. Pierre Jounel, the priest in charge of the subcommittee that created the Novus Ordo calendar, as stating:
The compilers’ aim was to emphasize more the cosmic and eschatological character of Christ’s kingship. The feast is now the feast of Christ “King of the universe” and is assigned to the last Sunday in Ordinary Time.
NB: There was a deliberate effort to de-emphasize the social reign of Jesus Christ, and this included changing the name of the feast so that it would henceforth refer to Christ as “King of the Universe.”
Dr. Foley further cites Calendarium Romanum, the document in which Paul VI announced the new calendar, saying:
The key word [in that document] is loco, which means“in place of” or “instead of.” The Pope could have simply stated that the Feast occurs on a different date (as he did with the Feast of the Holy Family) or that it is being moved (transfertur) as he did with Corpus Christi, but he did not. The Novus Ordo’s Solemnity of Christ the King, he writes, is the replacement of Pius XI’s feast.
In addition to the name, also replaced was the Collect, the traditional version of which reads (in a precise English translation):
Almighty everlasting God, who in Thy beloved Son, King of all men, hast willed to restore all things; mercifully grant that all the families of nations, rent asunder by the wound of sin, may be placed under His most pleasant rule.
Note the phrase “King of all men,” as well as the notion that the nations are under His rule. The Collect for the Novus Ordo Solemnity, by contrast, reads (official English translation):
Almighty ever-living God, whose will is to restore all things in your beloved Son, the King of the universe, grant, we pray, that the whole creation, set free from slavery, may render your majesty service and ceaselessly proclaim your praise. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever.
This Collect accomplishes precisely what Fr. Jounel stated (as quoted above), it emphasizes the eschatological dimension of Our Lord’s Kingship over and against the social.
Insofar as the law of prayer (lex orandi) – whether expressed in the traditional Roman Rite or the Novus Ordo – is informed by the law of belief (lex credendi) of the church in which it is celebrated, none of what has been stated thus far should come as a surprise.
As Francis plainly stated – and let’s give him credit for his forthrightness – the Novus Ordo is “the unique expression of the lex orandi” of the conciliar church over which he reigns. This law of prayer is informed by specifically conciliar beliefs, a lex credendi that in many ways is foreign to the faith of the Holy Catholic Church.
For example, the traditional Feast of Christ the King is informed by the firm Catholic belief that the nations of the world – its citizens and rulers alike – are duty bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ. The Novus Ordo Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe, on the other hand, is the product of a religion that actively discourages the Catholic confessional State, promoting instead a constitutional right to religious liberty (a proposition plainly condemned by the Catholic Church), thus effectively encouraging the separation of Church and State, a concept that Pope Pius X called “a most pernicious error.”
The conciliar “faith” (if you will allow) regarding the Kingship of Christ was expressed very clearly by Francis in his homily for the Solemnity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of the Universe in 2022. Among other things, he said:
On the cross, we see a single phrase: “This is the King of the Jews” (Lk 23:38). That is Jesus’ title: he is a king. Yet as we gaze upon him, our idea of a king is turned upside down. When we try to visualize a king, what comes to mind is a powerful man seated on a throne with magnificent insignia, a sceptre in his hand and precious rings on his fingers, speaking in solemn tones to his subjects.
In this, Francis is disparaging not only the Church’s patrimony of sacred art and its depiction of Christ the King, but more importantly he is denigrating the underlying doctrine of the faith as set forth so beautifully in Quas Primas. He continues:
Looking at Jesus, though, we see the complete opposite. He is not comfortably enthroned, but hanging on a gibbet. The God who “casts down the mighty from their thrones” (Lk 1:52) appears as a slave executed by those in power. Appareled only with nails and thorns, stripped of everything yet rich in love, from his throne on the cross he no longer teaches the crowds by his words; he no longer lifts his hands as a teacher. He does more: pointing a finger at no one, he opens his arms to all. That is how he shows himself to be our king: with open arms, a brasa aduerte.
This treatment is so theologically bankrupt as to invite, if not outright be, heresy insofar as it amounts to a denial of the Resurrection and the Ascension. Our Lord’s throne is not the Cross properly speaking; He is risen in glory and sits at the right hand of the Father Almighty.
Moreover, it simply is not true that Christ the King “no longer teaches the crowds by his words,” rather, He continues to teach – as well as to sanctify and govern – through the sacred ministers of the Holy Catholic Church, His Kingdom on earth, most notably the bishops in union with the Roman Pontiff, in such a way that He could say, “He who hears you hears me.” (Luke 10:16)
In the conciliar religion, as so plainly expressed by Francis, the King’s actual presence in this world, in His Church, and in her sacred ministers, has been replaced by the reign of humankind.
He ascended the cross, so that God would be present in every crucified man or woman throughout history. This is our king, the king of the universe… He loves us as we are, as we are right now. He gives us a chance to reign in this life, if only you surrender to his meek love that proposes but never imposes, a love that always forgives you.
Who “reigns in this life” according to the conciliar way? Man does. Bear well in mind that this isn’t Francis shooting from the hip and speaking for himself alone, rather, he’s merely expressing the religion of the Council.
“All things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown.” (Gaudium et Spes 12)
Readers may recall that Francis even plainly declared, no doubt with the conciliar teaching in mind:
The idea then is to rescue man, in the sense of returning him to the center: to the center of society, the center of thoughts, the focus of reflection. Place man once more at the center … bring him back to the center of reflection and the center of life. He is the king of the universe! And this is not theology, not philosophy – it is human reality. With this reality we will move forward.
Get that? While the conciliar church is happy to give lip service to Christ as King of the Universe, what this church truly believes is that the tile actually belongs to man.
As for Jesus? His role, as the Council sees it, is merely to “reveal man to man himself” (cf Gaudium et Spes 22), i.e., Jesus reveals to us our kingly status. In the words of Francis spoken to those present for his 2022 homily for the conciliar Solemnity, Jesus “always restores your royal dignity.”
So, one wonders, does the conciliar cosmic Christ actually reign?
It would seem that the answer is no, He does not. Francis informs us that Christ “never imposes,” as if He is a King that enjoins exactly no obligations or duties upon his subjects, i.e., He is “king” in name only.
Though Christ does not actually reign in any meaningful sense according to the conciliar mind, He does manage to inspire earthbound acts of social justice which serve to accentuate the dignity of man. This much was made plain in the homily for the Novus Ordo Solemnity as given by Benedict XVI, Bergoglio’s allegedly “traditional” predecessor in 2008:
“I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me” (Mt 25: 35) and so forth. Who does not know this passage? It is part of our civilization. It has marked the history of the peoples of Christian culture: the hierarchy of values, the institutions, the multiple charitable and social organizations. In fact, the Kingdom of Christ is not of this world, but it brings to fulfilment all the good that, thank God, exists in man and in history.
The act of distorting Our Lord’s declaration, “My kingdom is not of this world” in such way as to strip His reign of any real meaning in this world, emphasizing not His Sovereign Rights and our duties in light of the same, but rather all the good that exists in man, is pure humanism, a time-honored conciliar pastime to be sure.
Are we then to imagine that the exceedingly non-traditional concept of a cosmic “King of the Universe” whose reign bears little on matters social, temporal, or political – originated at Vatican II, an exercise that claimed to champion the principle of ressourcement, a “return to sources” ostensibly aimed at recovering and restoring valuable elements of Catholic tradition that, prior to the Council, had long since fallen into disuse?
The answer is yes, and no.
The uncrowning of Christ was indeed accomplished at Vatican Council II, and the concept of a cosmic King of the Universe with no real kingdom on earth of which to speak was, in fact, drawn from ancient sources. The problem, however, is that those sources are not at all Catholic.
I began writing this article with the intent of pulling together a number of disparate ideas that have been running through my mind of late, thinking that it would take just a hand full of hours at most. Now, many days later, I realize that entire books could be written on this topic. So, for now, I will wrap this up by broadly touching on several main points, even if I am unable to fully develop them at present.
– Consider that the Offertory as found in the Traditional Latin Mass was stripped out of the Novus Ordo. And what does one find in its place? Two Jewish barucha prayers (blessings) that are drawn, not from the Hebrew Scriptures, but rather the Talmud: Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation, for through your goodness…
As for the specific phrase, “King of the Universe,” it has the very same Talmudic roots:
– The Jewish Encyclopedia provides “a list of benedictions prescribed in the Talmud and adopted in the liturgy [of the synagogue]; each of them beginning with the formula ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord, our God, King of the Universe!'”
NB: The Talmud is not to be confused with the faith of the Patriarchs. It features a collection of diabolical anti-Christian invectives that, among other things, disparage Our Lady as a prostitute, while claiming that Our Lord is now in Hell boiling in excrement.
– Much is made (and for good reason) of the cries of the Jewish mob that demanded the crucifixion of Christ, “His blood be upon us and upon our children” (Mt 27:25). Not enough attention, however, is paid to the words of the Chief Priests who roused their minions to act: “We have no king but Caesar!” (John 19:15).
NB: The core identity of these peoples is defined by their direct opposition to Christ, not only as Messiah, but also very specifically as King.
In declaring their fealty to the emperor, the leaders of the mob were lying through their teeth, their pledge of loyalty to the Roman authorities was merely a ruse undertaken in order to preserve their own power. This would be made plain enough already in 66 A.D. when they rose up in rebellion against Nero.
In the centuries to follow, the unruliness of these enemies of Christ the King, a people without a country of their own, would be evidenced as time and again they served to corrupt the morals of the nations in which they lived, economically enslaving both the governed and their governments by way of usury and other nefarious practices.
This led to “stringent immigration laws being passed in France, Austria, Germany, England, Russia, Romania and elsewhere” in order to limit their degradational influence. (cf “The Jewish Question in Europe,” La Civilta Cattolica, 1890)
To be clear about whom we are speaking, the Haydock Bible commentary on Apocalypse 2:9 reads, “Having refused to own their true Messias, Jesus Christ, they are the Synagogue of Satan, the greatest enemies of the true faith,” persons described in the Biblical text as “those who say they are Jews and are not.” (ibid.)
At this, one should be mindful that when the Scriptures state that the Apostles were hiding “for fear of the Jews,” this does not refer to every individual person who claimed to be Jewish.
For instance, the Apostles were not hiding from the Blessed Virgin, Joseph of Arimathea, or any other righteous Jew, any more than they were hiding from their own parents or even from one another. Rather, they were hiding first and foremost from the self-appointed Jewish elite, a small portion of the broader population that exercised tremendous power and influence over the masses, much like today.
These “Jewish” elite and their operatives in our day (which includes numerous non-Jewish collaborators) are better known as Talmudists. Even if in large numbers many (perhaps most) are ignorant about the contents of the Talmud, still, they embody its anti-Christian ideals. It is these – not all self-identified Jews – who are rightly considered the “greatest enemies of the true faith.”
In the must-read 1890 article published in the Jesuit journal, La Civilta Cattolica, cited above, we find the following:
In Talmudism, the Christian nations are despised, but not primarily from a theological standpoint. Rather, Christians are reduced to a kind of moral nothingness, which contradicts the basic principles of natural law.
NB: Not primarily from a theological standpoint… The Sovereignty of Almighty God does not lie at the very heart of Talmudism. Much like the conciliar church (as noted above), it merely pays lip service to the Lord as “King of the Universe,” when what it truly holds is that man is king, but with one major difference. The Talmudists do not believe in the kingship of all men, but rather only of their own sovereign rights.
As the article in La Civilta Cattolica explains:
Another element which makes the Jewish organism in Christian countries so dangerous, and a hundred-fold abominably so, is the innately superstitious faith of the Talmud, which holds that the Jews not only form a superior race of human beings, all others being comprised of races inferior to them, but which, by a completely divine right, entitles them to the entire universe, which shall one day be theirs.
With the establishment of the modern state of Israel – brought into being through subterfuge, duplicitousness, and terrorism – no more is Talmudism a movement without a country. And yet, fork-tongued political figures also give lip service to “Christ is King” while pledging undying support for the Talmudist state.
Not content to mind their own affairs in their own (stolen) land, Talmudist control over other nations and their leaders has never been greater, whether obtained by way of religious deception (e.g., selling Zionism as a Christian ideal), economic extortion (like the international boycott of German goods that preceded WWII), the blackmail of those in power (Epstein Island), control over financial markets (the Federal Reserve and other national banking systems), etc.
A detailed account of Talmudist global political influence is beyond the scope of the present article. Their leading role in fomenting war-for-profit alone could comprise multiple volumes.
Suffice it to say for now that the Talmudist enterprise is, and always has been, best understood in terms of its direct opposition to the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ. It represents, just as the Haydock commentary states, “the greatest enemy of the true faith.”
Make no mistake, my friends, the enemy’s greatest victory to date by far (save for the Crucifixion itself) is the Second Vatican Council, a veritable coup that led to the creation of a counterfeit church that is deceiving many into believing that it is the Holy Catholic Church, the Kingdom of Christ on earth.
Religiously, politically, economically, socially, etc., in all of these ways, it appears that the greatest enemies of the true faith are all but unstoppable. They are the tip of the spear in promoting abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, pornography, radical anti-human environmentalism, warmongering, and practically every other godless enterprise on earth. Their influence is ubiquitous, despite the fact that they comprise but a tiny percentage of the world’s population. One is tempted, perhaps, to lose hope.
But alas, the Blessed Virgin has provided the ultimate remedy.
In 1929, Our Lady of Fatima came to Sr. Lucia and, as promised, delivered to her the request of her Son for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart. The promise attached to that request was that, if done accordingly, Russia would be converted and the world would experience a period of peace.
Apart from this, “Russia will spread its errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions of the Church.”
Concerning the errors of Russia, one immediately thinks of atheistic Communism, and all of its inglorious components. In short, we are speaking of an overthrow of the Christian social order, a Talmudic form of messiansim that proposes to create a utopian ideal apart from God who, in the Person of Christ the King, reigns over all things.
There is but one way that a period of peace on earth could ever be realized. The consecration of Russia should be understood as a means to that end:
When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas)
Don’t be fooled: Any attempt to downplay the principles set forth in Quas Primas, as the conciliar church and its Novus Ordo does, by “emphasizing more the cosmic and eschatological character of Christ’s kingship,” no matter how subtle, is playing directly into the hands of His greatest enemies.
