UK: Second Lockdown Inevitable – Will The Public Continue To Obey, Or Rebel? 

Comment: 

In the highly likely event of another full-scale national lockdown (which is sure to include Scotland), will the people continue to comply unquestioningly?  Will it dawn on anyone that no Government can eradicate a virus – otherwise, thousands would not die from the flu every winter… Will it dawn on anyone?

But here’s the key point for consideration.  The previous lockdown was sold to us as being of very short duration – and look at us now.  Is this second, highly likely lockdown (despite the thin protestations that this is not what anyone in Government wants to happen) likely to only last for the proposed two weeks?  Really?  Or is that as likely as the Government handing back its “emergency” powers when the “emergency” has passed.  No question mark there, because that’s a rhetorical question.  Share your thoughts.

General Discussion (17)…

If there’s something of interest in the news that’s not covered in one of the topic threads, or you have a question to ask, a comment you’d like to make about anything under the sun, more or less, this is the thread for you.

However, please check first, to ensure that you haven’t missed a topic thread or another thread where it would be appropriate to post your comment, as the GD discussion threads fills up very quickly.

Readers, all too often, go straight to the General Discussion thread to post news that is already the topic of a thread or to ask a question that is already being discussed elsewhere. So, do your Sherlock Holmes – at the very least check the side-bar – before posting here, please and thank you! Your “news” may simply be a different angle on a subject already under discussion, so do, please check before posting your comment here. OR it would be helpful if you could check out the most recent thread on that subject, in case it is still open. In which case, your comment would be best placed there. 

Feel free, also, to share your favourite spiritual reading books, prayers and devotions on this thread. Whatever. Enjoy!

To read previous General Discussion threads, click on the links below –  (1) = first General Discussion thread… 

(1) click here (2) click here (3) click here (4) click here (5) click here
(6) click here (7) click here (8) click here (9) click here (10) click here
(11) click here (12) click here (13) click here (14) click here (15) click here
(16) click here

 

Catholics MUST Be ProLife:Action!(3)

A 4D ultrasound test is a way of reproducing a moving image of your baby inside your womb. The 4D ultrasound uses sound waves to create this moving image. In a 3D ultrasound, you can see a three-dimensional image of your baby. A 4D ultrasound takes this experience to the next level. It creates an effect that is similar to watching a live video. Using this technology, you can see what your baby is doing at that moment inside your womb. In fact, you can even see if your baby is yawning or smiling at that particular moment!

This thread is dedicated to sharing news about pro-life issues.

Where possible, we suggest that bloggers make and respond to calls to action in defence of the unborn child – whether that entails emailing MPs or supporting various vigils etc.
Try not to simply post a link to news – publish an extract and/or make a suggestion about possible action, that will encourage readers to click your link.

Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. The Second Vatican Council defines abortion, together with infanticide, as an “unspeakable crime”.54
But today, in many people’s consciences, the perception of its gravity has become progressively obscured. The acceptance of abortion in the popular mind, in behaviour and even in law itself, is a telling sign of an extremely dangerous crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of distinguishing between good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception. In this regard the reproach of the Prophet is extremely straightforward: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Is 5:20). Especially in the case of abortion there is a widespread use of ambiguous terminology, such as “interruption of pregnancy”, which tends to hide abortion’s true nature and to attenuate its seriousness in public opinion. Perhaps this linguistic phenomenon is itself a symptom of an uneasiness of conscience. But no word has the power to change the reality of things: procured abortion is the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth.

The moral gravity of procured abortion is apparent in all its truth
if we recognize that we are dealing with murder…
Pope John Paul II: Evangelium Vitae – on the Value and Inviolability, of Human Life #58  [Emphasis added]   Click here to read the entire encyclical

To read Pro-Life thread (2) click here

Governments Bribed To Create Covid Panic – NOT A Conspiracy Theory…

Comment: 

The above video is spectacular in its exposé of the truth about the pandemic – clearly the Irish Government is no different from the governments of the UK in its crackdown on the civil liberties of the people of Ireland.  In every respect, Dave Cullen’s video is first class.  Supported by facts and figures, he confirms what we’ve discussed on this blog many times, that this pandemic is, in fact, a “scamdemic”, engineered by the “powers-that-be” who want to achieve a  de-populated, “greener” world – by fair means or foul. Bribery seems to have been one method used to get world governments to impose their Covid-19 panic and restrictions. It’s by no means unusual for conditions to be attached to loans, of course, so the term “bribe” is likely to be rejected on that basis.  In any event, whether “conditions” or “bribes” it’s murky stuff.  Dave Cullen highlights the claim made by the President of Belarus…

FROM ARMSTRONG ECONOMICS…

Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko REFUSED the offer and stated that he could not accept such an offer and would put his people above the needs of the IMF and World Bank. This is NOT a conspiracy. You may research this yourself. He actually said this!

Now IMF and World Bank are bailing out failing airlines with billions of dollars, and in exchange, they are FORCING airline CEOs to implement VERY STRICT POLICIES such as FORCED face masks covers on EVERYONE, including SMALL CHILDREN, whose health will suffer as a result of these policies.

And if it is true for Belarus, then it is true for the rest of the world! The IMF and World Bank want to crash every major economy with the intent of buying over every nation’s infrastructure at cents on the dollar!   Source – Armstrong Economics

Consider…

Is anyone really surprised at the idea of international bodies bribing Governments or, given what we know of the characters of our political leaders, that they might find such bribery – or “conditions” –  acceptable?   

USA: Faithful Priest Speaks Out – “You Can’t Be A Catholic And A Democrat!”

LA CROSSE, Wisconsin, September 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Hundreds of people descended on a rural Wisconsin city on Sunday in a show of support for Father James Altman, whose viral video message, “You can’t be a Catholic and a Democrat,” has now been viewed more than 660,000 times.  

Fr. Altman’s bishop, the Most Rev. William P. Callahan, recently threatened the outspoken priest with “canonical penalties” for his video, even as public support for the priest has surged among rank-and-file Catholics around the country.  

Supporters reportedly came from as far away as Puerto Rico to pray the rosary for Fr. Altman, who has been called “brave and courageous,” a “true shepherd,” and a “modern-day John the Baptist.” Many supporters praised Altman for empowering laity and priests alike to be bold and speak the truth. 

Nearly all the prayer rally participants interviewed by LifeSiteNews shared a common sentiment: “We need more priests like Fr. Altman who are true shepherds.”  

“When you look at how many people showed up today, that came from many states away, that just speaks volumes about how hungry people are for truth,” said one woman. “What a great gift Fr. Altman has for being able to proclaim that truth in an eloquent way that not only empowers the public.” He is “empowering our priests as well.”

“Fr. Altman speaks the truth loud and clear and bold,” observed another. “We need more priests like him.” 

“Fr. Altman is a rare breed. He’s a modern-day St. John the Baptist,” declared another. “He’s really changed my life and so many others he’s had that impact on. We need more priests who are true shepherds.”

“He takes his role as shepherd extremely seriously and we need that, especially in today’s world,” the Fr. Altman supporter continued. “There’s so much chaos, and I love how he calls out the ‘brood of vipers’ within the Church, within our government.”    

“He is motivating us Catholics to do more than just watch him on video and feel good,” she added, saying that she thinks people will now get out to defend the faith. “I think he is being used by God as a catalyst for change within the parishioners in Catholic churches, not only here in Wisconsin, but all around the world.”

One young woman told LifeSiteNews that she believes a lot of priests remain silent because of fear of repercussions from the hierarchy.  

“Fr. Altman is so brave and courageous that he’s willing to risk all of that for us so that souls might be saved and that people might be spared from the eternal fires of hell,” she noted. 

“Fr. Altman is an incredibly humble man,” said a woman who works at Fr. Altman’s parish, St. James the Less in La Crosse, as she waved her hand, pointing to the large surrounding crowd. “I think this whole thing really mystifies him.”

She said she was shocked to see people from all around the country come to support her parish priest. That support is needed, though, because Fr. Altman “preaches the truth [which is] sometimes hard for people to hear; it can be hard to swallow, and so there are some people who are resistant to the truth.”

A man who said he’s not Catholic but showed up to support Fr. Altman nonetheless commented, “We’ve been watching his homilies since May.” 

“We love these fellow patriots, we love them, we care about them,” he continued.  

He said he has been disappointed with some members of the “Protestant clergy not speaking up.” 

“We’ve got Fr. Altman over here, our friend, speaking up boldly, so we’re 100% behind him,” he concluded. 

Father Richard Heilman, a popular speaker and writer who led the “Peaceful Prayer Rosary Rally,” said, “I know a lot of people wrote letters of appreciation to Fr. Altman’s bishop, and I bet he saw thousands – if not tens of thousands – of letters, because we all do appreciate Fr. James Altman.” 

“Bottom line: He loves, loves, loves his flock, and so like a good shepherd, if he sees the wolves invading, he sounds the warning alarm,” said Heilman. 

“Finally!” proclaimed Heilman. “Finally someone with such fiery passion is speaking directly to what’s going on in the Church and in the world, and we’re so eternally grateful to him for that.”  Source – Lifesitenews

Comments invited…  

USA: Doctor Against Forced Covid-19 Vaccine References Nazi Doctors…

Comment:

Which of the arguments put forward by the young doctor in the video above do you find most persuasive?  And is he right to reference history, linking a forced vaccination programme now, to the activities of Nazi doctors during the Second World War, or are modern democratic Governments such as the USA and the UK highly unlikely to abuse their authority in any way akin to what happened during the war?  Remember, we haven’t been told the truth about Covid-19 which is not, as the doctor points out in the interview above, anything like as deadly as we were originally led to believe.  So, what do you think…  to force vaccinations on populations or not to force vaccinations – that is the question.

Vote in the poll below, and then share your thoughts. 

Converting to Catholicism: No Easy Task for a Protestant Pastor – Here’s Why… 

Comment: 

Keith Nester, the above speaker, made me wonder just how many people turn away from the Church due to the obstacles identified in the video. Happily, Mr Nester managed to get help to overcome the difficulties which he encountered, but how many others don’t move beyond initial enquiries or experiences, discouraged because of the Catholics they meet?  My favourite convert is a friend who became a Catholic after years of reading about Fatima.  What about you – any interesting conversion stories, whether your own, perhaps a favourite saint-convert,  or the conversion  of someone you know, family or friend?    We need a break from Covid and tyrannical governance so get typing those conversion stories and related issues – and that’s an order!  😀  

USA: Use of Executive Power to Declare Health Emergency has its Limits – Lawyer

Comment:  

The lawyer in the above video won, impressively, when he represented priests and rabbis in court, challenging the lockdown rules in New York which militated against places of worship…

As for Scotland – do we have any lawyers who are concerned at the way our personal and religious liberty is being eroded?  As we face the continual introduction of fresh rules and regulations, with a further lockdown always hanging over our heads, do we have any legal recourse to challenge the removal of our personal freedom?  Should we simply accept the fact that we cannot invite people into our home or visit the homes of our relatives and friends? Should the Government really be able to issue such orders?  Restrict the number of people who may gather for a chat?

And what about our religious liberty… In the event of another full-blown lockdown, with a repeated ban on attending church, do we have any clergy who might pursue a case to challenge the State’s interference in Church matters?  

The New York case, as Chris Ferrara points out, was not brought by diocesan clergy/bishops, but by traditional priests, so that means, in Scotland, that either the priests of the Society of St Peter (FSSP) or the priests of the Society of St Pius X (FSSPX) are in the frame.  There are not a lot of them, to be fair, so it seems unlikely that either of those groups will be plaintiffs in court any time soon.  And, of course, as we know, the diocesan bishops are very keen to keep the churches under the thumb of the Government.  So, they’re never going to institute a legal challenge.  In any case, is it desirable?  Or should we all just accept our lot, and offer up the injustice?   Share your thoughts…   

Archbishop Viganò: Don’t Leave the Church – Stay and Fight the Modernists! 

This new statement is important, inasmuch as in recent days, both Father Thomas Weinandy, as well as Father Raymond de Souza, spread the suspicion that the Italian prelate might be “schismatic,” thus intending to leave the Catholic Church. This suspicion had arisen because of Viganò’s critique of the Second Vatican Council and its detrimental effects on the life of the faith in the Church. For example, de Souza’s article is entitled: “Is Archbishop Viganò’s Rejection of the Second Vatican Council Promoting Schism?” And Weinandy stated: “My concern is that, in his radical reading of the Council, the archbishop is spawning his own schism.”

In an August 22 article published by the traditional Catholic newspaper Catholic Family News, Kokx had asked Viganò a set of questions with regard to what faithful laity can do in the midst of this Church crisis that is going back to the Council. 

Kokx suggested Viganò needs to give more advice to laity and priests on what to do next: “He’s certainly diagnosed the problem, but what are his solutions, if any? What, in other words, is it that he believes Catholics in the 21st century should do in response to the crisis?”

Archbishop Viganò’s response as published on September 1 by Catholic Family News (see full text below) is clear: it is not the faithful Catholics who oppose the changing of the faith, but those who perpetrate these changes that ought to be questioned. He writes that we need to discuss “the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them.”

If people who hold heterodox views are in positions of authority in the Church, he continues, “It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.”

In addition and on a practical level, the Italian prelate gives us advice on how to live and grow in the faith, working on our sanctification and remaining in the state of “sanctifying grace.” But at the same time, we are to assist and “comfort” good priests and bishops, seeking out reverent Masses. 

“Faithful laity have the right and the duty to find priests, communities, and institutes that are faithful to the perennial Magisterium,” Viganò explains. “And may they know how to accompany the laudable celebration of the liturgy in the Ancient Rite with adherence to sound doctrine and morals, without any subsidence on the front of the Council.”

Finally, Archbishop Viganò also praises the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), which has defended the traditional faith for decades now. They “deserve recognition” for their work of preserving the Catholic faith, he says, and adds that he considers Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the founder of this Society, to be a “confessor of the Faith.”

Here we might remember that just recently, a cardinal stated that Lefebvre will one day be declared a “Doctor of the Church” and that he was “prophetic.”

Let us close with Viganò’s last words of his response to Kokx’s questions:

“The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother. The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.”

Below is the full statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, reprinted with permission:

Disclaimer: The following positions adopted and advice offered by Archbishop Viganò do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews and are presented only for your information.

Dear Mr. Kokx,

I read with lively interest your article “Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is Right about Vatican II, But What Does He Think Catholic Should Do Now?” which was published by Catholic Family News on August 22 (here). I am happy to respond to your questions, which address matters that are very important for the faithful.

You ask: “What would ‘separating’ from the Conciliar Church look like in Archbishop Viganò’s opinion?” I respond to you with another question: “What does it mean to separate from the Catholic Church according to the supporters of the Council?” While it is clear that no admixture is possible with those who propose adulterated doctrines of the conciliar ideological manifesto, it should be noted that the simple fact of being baptized and of being living members of the Church of Christ does not imply adherence to the conciliar team; this is true above all for the simple faithful and also for secular and regular clerics who, for various reasons, sincerely consider themselves Catholics and recognize the Hierarchy.

Instead, what needs to be clarified is the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them. It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.

Once this point has been clarified, it is evident that it is not the traditional faithful – that is, true Catholics, in the words of Saint Pius X – that must abandon the Church in which they have the full right to remain and from which it would be unfortunate to separate; but rather the Modernists who usurp the Catholic name, precisely because it is only the bureaucratic element that permits them not to be considered on a par with any heretical sect. This claim of theirs serves in fact to prevent them from ending up among the hundreds of heretical movements that over the course of the centuries have believed to be able to reform the Church at their own pleasure, placing their pride ahead of humbly guarding the teaching of Our Lord. But just as it is not possible to claim citizenship in a homeland in which one does not know its language, law, faith and tradition; so it is impossible that those who do not share the faith, morals, liturgy, and discipline of the Catholic Church can arrogate to themselves the right to remain within her and even to ascend the levels of the hierarchy.

The situation is certainly more complex for clerics, who depend hierarchically on their bishop or religious superior, but who at the same time have the right to remain Catholic and be able to celebrate according to the Catholic Rite. On the one hand laity have more freedom of movement in choosing the community to which they turn for Mass, the Sacraments, and religious instruction, but less autonomy because of the fact that they still have to depend on a priest; on the other hand, clerics have less freedom of movement, since they are incardinated in a diocese or order and are subject to ecclesiastical authority, but they have more autonomy because of the fact that they can legitimately decide to celebrate the Mass and administer the Sacraments in the Tridentine Rite and to preach in conformity with sound doctrine. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reaffirmed that faithful and priests have the inalienable right – which cannot be denied – to avail themselves of the liturgy that more perfectly expresses their Catholic Faith. But this right must be used today not only and not so much to preserve the extraordinary form of the rite, but to testify to adherence to the depositum fidei that finds perfect correspondence only in the Ancient Rite.

I daily receive heartfelt letters from priests and religious who are marginalized or transferred or ostracized because of their fidelity to the Church: the temptation to find an ubi consistam [a place to stand] far from the clamor of the Innovators is strong, but we ought to take an example from the persecutions that many saints have undergone, including Saint Athanasius, who offers us a model of how to behave in the face of widespread heresy and persecuting fury. As my venerable brother Bishop Athanasius Schneider has many times recalled, the Arianism that afflicted the Church at the time of the Holy Doctor of Alexandria in Egypt was so widespread among the bishops that it leaves one almost to believe that Catholic orthodoxy had completely disappeared. But it was thanks to the fidelity and heroic testimony of the few bishops who remained faithful that the Church knew how to get back up again. Without this testimony, Arianism would not have been defeated; without our testimony today, Modernism and the globalist apostasy of this pontificate will not be defeated.

It is therefore not a question of working from within the Church or outside it: the winemakers are called to work in the Lord’s Vineyard, and it is there that they must remain even at the cost of their lives; the pastors are called to pastor the Lord’s Flock, to keep the ravenous wolves at bay and to drive away the mercenaries who are not concerned with the salvation of the sheep and lambs.

This hidden and often silent work has been carried out by the Society of Saint Pius X, which deserves recognition for not having allowed the flame of Tradition to be extinguished at a moment in which celebrating the ancient Mass was considered subversive and a reason for excommunication. Its priests have been a healthy thorn in the side for a hierarchy that has seen in them an unacceptable point of comparison for the faithful, a constant reproach for the betrayal committed against the people of God, an inadmissible alternative to the new conciliar path. And if their fidelity made disobedience to the pope inevitable with the episcopal consecrations, thanks to them the Society was able to protect herself from the furious attack of the Innovators and by its very existence it allowed the possibility of the liberalization of the Ancient Rite, which until then was prohibited. Its presence also allowed the contradictions and errors of the conciliar sect to emerge, always winking at heretics and idolaters but implacably rigid and intolerant towards Catholic Truth.

I consider Archbishop Lefebvre an exemplary confessor of the Faith, and I think that by now it is obvious that his denunciation of the Council and the modernist apostasy is more relevant than ever. It should not be forgotten that the persecution to which Archbishop Lefebvre was subjected by the Holy See and the world episcopate served above all as a deterrent for Catholics who were refractory toward the conciliar revolution.

I also agree with the observation of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais about the co-presence of two entities in Rome: the Church of Christ has been occupied and eclipsed by the modernist conciliar structure, which has established itself in the same hierarchy and uses the authority of its ministers to prevail over the Spouse of Christ and our Mother.

The Church of Christ – which not only subsists in the Catholic Church, but is exclusively the Catholic Church – is only obscured and eclipsed by a strange extravagant Church established in Rome, according to the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich. It coexists, like wheat with the tare, in the Roman Curia, in dioceses, in parishes. We cannot judge our pastors for their intentions, nor suppose that all of them are corrupt in faith and morals; on the contrary, we can hope that many of them, hitherto intimidated and silent, will understand, as confusion and apostasy continue to spread, the deception to which they have been subjected and will finally shake off their slumber. There are many laity who are raising their voice; others will necessarily follow, together with good priests, certainly present in every diocese. This awakening of the Church militant – I would dare to call it almost a resurrection – is necessary, urgent and inevitable: no son tolerates his mother being outraged by the servants, or his father being tyrannized by the administrators of his goods. The Lord offers us, in these painful situations, the possibility of being His allies in fighting this holy battle under His banner: the King Who is victorious over error and death permits us to share the honor of triumphal victory and the eternal reward that derives from it, after having endured and suffered with Him.

But in order to deserve the immortal glory of Heaven we are called to rediscover – in an emasculated age devoid of values such as honor, faithfulness to one’s word, and heroism – a fundamental aspect of the faith of every baptized person: the Christian life is a militia, and with the Sacrament of Confirmation we are called to be soldiers of Christ, under whose insignia we must fight. Of course, in most cases it is essentially a spiritual battle, but over the course of history we have seen how often, faced with the violation of the sovereign rights of God and the liberty of the Church, it was also necessary to take up arms: we are taught this by the strenuous resistance to repel the Islamic invasions in Lepanto and on the outskirts of Vienna, the persecution of the Cristeros in Mexico, of the Catholics in Spain, and even today by the cruel war against Christians throughout the world. Never as today can we understand the theological hatred coming from the enemies of God, inspired by Satan. The attack on everything that recalls the Cross of Christ – on Virtue, on the Good and the Beautiful, on purity – must spur us to get up, in a leap of pride, in order to claim our right not only not to be persecuted by our external enemies but also and above all to have strong and courageous pastors, holy and God-fearing, who will do exactly what their predecessors have done for centuries: preach the Gospel of Christ, convert individuals and nations, and expand the Kingdom of the living and true God throughout the world.

We are all called to make an act of Fortitude – a forgotten cardinal virtue, which not by chance in Greek recalls virile strength, ἀνδρεία – in knowing how to resist the Modernists: a resistance that is rooted in Charity and Truth, which are attributes of God.

If you only celebrate the Tridentine Mass and preach sound doctrine without ever mentioning the Council, what can they ever do to you? Throw you out of your churches, perhaps, and then what? No one can ever prevent you from renewing the Holy Sacrifice, even if it is on a makeshift altar in a cellar or an attic, as the refractory priests did during the French Revolution, or as happens still today in China. And if they try to distance you, resist: canon law serves to guarantee the government of the Church in the pursuit of its primary purposes, not to demolish it. Let’s stop fearing that the fault of the schism lies with those who denounce it, and not, instead, with those who carry it out: the ones who are schismatics and heretics are those who wound and crucify the Mystical Body of Christ, not those who defend it by denouncing the executioners!

The laity can expect their ministers to behave as such, preferring those who prove that they are not contaminated by present errors. If a Mass becomes an occasion of torture for the faithful, if they are forced to assist at sacrileges or to support heresies and ramblings unworthy of the House of the Lord, it is a thousand times preferable to go to a church where the priest celebrates the Holy Sacrifice worthily, in the rite given to us by Tradition, with preaching in conformity with sound doctrine. When parish priests and bishops realize that the Christian people demand the Bread of Faith, and not the stones and scorpions of the neo-church, they will lay aside their fears and comply with the legitimate requests of the faithful. The others, true mercenaries, will show themselves for what they are and will be able to gather around them only those who share their errors and perversions. They will be extinguished by themselves: the Lord dries up the swamp and makes the land on which brambles grow arid; he extinguishes vocations in corrupt seminaries and in convents rebellious to the Rule.

The lay faithful today have a sacred task: to comfort good priests and good bishops, gathering like sheep around their shepherds. Give them hospitality, help them, console them in their trials. Create community in which murmuring and division do not predominate, but rather fraternal charity in the bond of Faith. And since in the order established by God – κόσμος – subjects owe obedience to authority and cannot do otherwise than resist it when it abuses its power, no fault will be attributed to them for the infidelity of their leaders, on whom rests the very serious responsibility for the way in which they exercise the vicarious power which has been given to them. We must not rebel, but oppose; we must not be pleased with the errors of our pastors, but pray for them and admonish them respectfully; we must not question their authority but the way in which they use it.

I am certain, with a certainty that comes to me from Faith, that the Lord will not fail to reward our fidelity, after having punished us for the faults of the men of the Church, granting us holy priests, holy bishops, holy cardinals, and above all a holy Pope. But these saints will arise from our families, from our communities, from our churches: families, communities, and churches in which the grace of God must be cultivated with constant prayer, with the frequenting of Holy Mass and the Sacraments, with the offering of sacrifices and penances that the Communion of Saints permits us to offer to the Divine Majesty in order to expiate our sins and those of our brethren, including those who exercise authority. The laity have a fundamental role in this, guarding the Faith within their families, in such a way that our young people who are educated in love and in the fear of God may one day be responsible fathers and mothers, but also worthy ministers of the Lord, His heralds in the male and female religious orders, and His apostles in civil society.

The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
September 1, 2020               

Source               

Comments invited…                                    

Sinister, Rogue UK Government(s) Rule By Diktat – MPs MUST Speak Out…

Comment: 

The following letter was written by a couple in England and is offered here as an encouragement to others to write to MPs right across the UK – we really do need to make our voices heard as the governments of the UK continue to rule by decree or diktat – the form of governance normally associated with Communist-style tyrannical regimes.  As we have seen on this blog via a number of video clips, the UK is quickly becoming a police state, with officers acting as agents of the State, by enforcing measures (supposedly temporary) which are based on political ideology, masquerading as science.  So, read the letter below and share your thoughts:  are we being led, now by sinister forces?  Are we no longer sleep-walking, but now marching into a permanent form of tyrannical government, where no dissent is permitted and will, in fact, lead to hefty fines or imprisonment?  Our personal freedom is being trampled underfoot, right across the UK where each of the four devolved administrations is ruling by diktat.  Writing to our local MPs is important – they need to know that we are extremely angry about the loss of our liberty.  The couple below have made their feelings very clear – hopefully, after reading the text of their letter, you will be motivated to write to your own MP, as a matter of urgency. 

Letter to an MP in England…

Dear…. MP…

Re: Coronavirus Regulations

Boris Johnson said today:

“The world we want to move to is one where everyone can take an enabling test at the start of every day.”

Is that the world you want your children to live in? Since my letter of 23 May 2020, we continue to live, as we have since in the passage of the Coronavirus Act 2020, subject to the absolute diktat of our incompetent health secretary, Matthew Hancock, with no scrutiny from parliament, no transparency on government advice and decision-making, and no accountability. This is strange, as serious cases of Covid-19 have reduced to statistically negligible levels, notwithstanding continued government lies about a “second wave”, as shown by these chart [sic]

This is against a backdrop of significantly increased testing (see below), which is known to yield a high percentage of false positive results.

It is incredible that more MPs are not speaking out against this abuse of power, or the fact that the stated reasons for these restrictions on liberty have been repeatedly superseded by further specious reasons. You are paid to represent the interests of your constituents, whose remaining liberties are now the plaything of a rogue government. Please let me know what you intend to do to hold the government to account for its reckless and sinister actions. In particular, I trust you will be able to confirm you intend to vote against extending the current intolerable despotism for a further two years when the act comes up for a parliamentary vote at the end of September. If not, please can you explain why you believe should continue to draw your salary?

The government has just announced that it will be restricting gatherings to 6 persons as of Monday. It has done no impact assessment for this. This is in addition to numerous other harmful measures introduced on a similar basis, including:

1. Mandatory face coverings on public transport.

2. Mandatory face coverings in shops.

3. A £10,000 fine for organising an “illegal gathering” (which since the case of Piers Corbyn we now know will now include any  political  protest to challenge the government’s action, but not protests organised by terrorist groups such as BLM and Extinction Rebellion).

None of these measures is remotely justified, given the fact that the risk now posed to the general public by Covid-19 is in line with background risks encountered every day. What is particularly monstrous is the reinforcement and redoubling of such restrictions against a backdrop of diminishing risk. I can see no reason for this other than the government’s desire to promote public fear to perpetuate its autocratic and unaccountable rule – whether because it is hoping its incompetence is not found out, or for more sinister reasons.

The government now proposes to roll out vaccines to vulnerable people that have not been properly subject to full clinical trials and concerning which no evidence exists on long-term side effects. It is certain that, given the public appetite for such a vaccine, this action will result directly in many deaths and many more life-changing side effects; and more again, if the vaccine is mandated. The fact that the government is aware of this risk is evident in the consultation document issued in respect of these proposed measures (see here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/distributing-vaccines-and- s-and-treatments-for-covid-19-and-flu).
Ed:  this link leads to an Error Page. I think the author of the letter may have meant to link to this page

The government still refuses to rule out vaccine mandation – a crime against human dignity worthy of Josef Mengele –  and in addition there are plans to introduce a digital ID card (see the article in the Times available here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/digital-id-cards-lead-the-dominic-cummings-data-revolution-v750fn3kt), likely containing immunisation status information. I repeat what I wrote in my last letter; if such a card is introduced I will consider myself under an obligation to disregard such a wicked law. A UK parliamentary petition opposing any enforcement of vaccination has exceeded 100,000 subscriptions (see here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/323442).

Such invasive and far-reaching measures could only be contemplated (if at all) for the most severe reasons, and in light of a thorough and transparent risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis. I pointed out the deplorable lack of any such analysis in my earlier correspondence. Mr Hancock incredibly dismissed the need for any such analysis in a press conference on 15 June 2020. The fact that the government still refuses to offer transparency on its decision-making is sinister beyond description.

The lack of vigour or urgency with which the official opposition has conducted itself in this matter is frankly disgraceful. I look forward to hearing what you plan to do to restore our liberties, the rule of law, and hold the government to account. If you plan to do nothing, I look forward to hearing your evidence-based reasons for doing nothing.

Yours sincerely,   Ends – all emphases added…

Comments invited…
___________________________________________________________________________