USA: Mob Rule ‘New Normal’ – Could This Happen In Increasingly Secular UK? 

Comment: 

Quite openly now, some Americans appear to be of the opinion that they hate Trump more than they love a peaceful, ordered, law-abiding lifestyle.  Ridiculous calls to defund the police and abolish prisons underline this lunacy.  There’s clearly – it seems to me – a demonic input here.  

However, shouldn’t we be sitting up and paying attention in the UK? One doctor interviewed on TV this morning, divulged the fact that those in the health advisory business awaited with bated breath to see just how compliant the people of the UK would be under lockdown and continuing restrictions.  They were, apparently, amazed.  Little wonder, as the majority were, indeed, compliant.  All talk about “blind faith” and “unquestioning obedience” – once applied sarcastically to religious people, specifically Catholics – were now applicable to… well…  just about the entire population. 

With talk now of a second (and more) wave of the virus, with the possibility of more lockdowns, whether local or national, that blind faith just might, who knows, give way to a lot of questioning and, albeit belated, fact-finding, which may lead to civil unrest across the four nations…

But here’s a thought: both the SNP Government in Scotland and the Westminster Government in England were very sympathetic to the thousands who turned out to support the Black Lives Matter protests – where neither social distancing nor face-mask rules were enforced; with the police generally turning a blind eye to all that “keep safe” stuff.  So, what do you think – might we find ourselves in an equally lawless situation, as lockdown frustrations boil over, not least when people begin to feel the financial pinch, and perhaps find themselves unemployed?  We all sincerely hope not, I am sure, but is it a possibility?  And if so, who will the politicians (and the clergy)  support – the police or the protesters?  

Catholic Church: Why the Scandalous Compliance in Covid-19 “Crisis”?

One of the most shocking aspects of the Covid-19 lockdown, with its serious restrictions on personal freedoms, both civil and religious, is the way in which the Church has co-operated – from the Pope down. No questions asked, simply uncritical obedience, of the kind not even expected of religious men and women in monasteries.  The language of docility is writ large on Catholic diocesan, and even traditional, websites.

Priests are embracing the Government restrictions, even as we are “permitted” to return to Mass.   Thus we see limits on the numbers allowed to attend, the use of hand sanitizers, etc. 

The traditional Fraternity of St Peter (FSSP) – certainly in Edinburgh – is going along, hook, line and sinker, with Government policy: everyone but the priest  has to wear a face mask, Mass will be shorter, people must book for Mass because only 40 permitted etc.  Click here to read the entire scandalous nonsense.  Informed Catholics are increasingly scandalised at the co-operation (for which read “complicity) of Churchmen in this fabricated crisis…

Email…

One reader emailed as follows a day or so ago…

…Anyway, my question relates to the ‘official’ line taken by the SSPX in regard to the crisis in general.  An acquaintance has stated that  they were told ‘…it’s not a persecution, nothing to do with Fatima and the general advice was to just do what the Govt says and wait for everything to go back to normal…’.  Now, do the SSPX honestly and truly believe that?  Surely not.  No-one else seems to, so why should they.  Do their sermons ever mention anything along these lines, and is anything said in general conversations with the faithful; assuming they do actually talk to people.  I don’t know anyone attending a Society Mass Centre at present so I can’t ask anyone else.

In another email, a reader commented that her Society priest rubbished the idea of any connection with Fatima, opined that it was irresponsible to promote that idea and that queuing at supermarkets was no big deal – a small inconvenience.  Maybe for him with nothing much to do but out here in the big wide world it is anything but a minor inconvenience.  And yet another Catholic, who watched the SSPX live-stream Masses in America, was shocked to see the priest dipping his fingers into water after giving each Host to parishioners at Holy Communion time.  What?!**   

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre

However, there is no official statement that I can find on the SSPX UK website, although I was delighted to read the following heartening comment from the District Superior, Fr Robert Brucciani in his editorial in the District magazine, Ite Missa Est, July-August edition –  Heartening, in that it shows that Fr Brucciani is certainly aware of the sinister nature of this contrived crisis…

 

 

Father Robert Brucciani writes…

My dear brethren, There is a collective sense that the world is on the cusp of dramatic change. Already, the Covid-19 crisis and recent civil unrest in  many countries – both bearing hallmarks of sinister orchestration – have been the occasion of mass social conditioning and a dramatic encroachment upon religious and civil rights.

Regrettably, it seems that more of the same is to follow. The mainstream media are creating expectation with expressions like “the new normal”, economic meltdown is imminent, and the World Economic Forum – an organisation for the minions of the New World Order – have launched an initiative called “The Great Reset” which seems to augur the imposition of more direct individual control, ecologism, and the culture of death upon the entire planet.

Meanwhile, God is ignored in all this upheaval and men of good will are finding themselves being manoeuvred into making a choice between supporting the “new normal” of the cultural Marxists or face social and economic exclusion.

Our hope should not fail, however, for the evil that is visiting upon us is the occasion of great heroism on the part of those who stand firm in the Catholic faith… End of Extract – read entire Editorial here

Thus, with such clear thinking on the political – and evil – nature of the Covid-19 “crisis”, it is incomprehensible to Catholics aware of the very real crisis in the Church, that the SSPX should appear to accept, at any level, Government restrictions on our religious freedom, choosing to blame the diocesan Bishops for the closure of churches and continuing restrictions on the practice of the Faith.   We need to see concrete evidence of the “great heroism” of which Fr Brucciani speaks.  Don’t we all need to risk falling foul of the Government by refusing to keep the rules which are leading us into the “new normal”?   Or would that be to lack the virtue of prudence?   I wonder what St Thomas More would advise? 

The SSPX does not have to obey the local Bishops on this, that’s for sure. They can’t blame the Bishops.  So, the question remains, why do they? And why is there no dissent among the best of the diocesan clergy – I heard from another reader that the “traditional” parish in the north of Glasgow, is permitting only 50 people to attend Sunday Masses.  

With talk of a second wave (to be followed by a third and fourth wave…) there is clearly not going to be any end to this fake crisis.  Somebody in the Church is going to have to make the first move and say “We will not serve!”    Why can’t it be the Society of St Pius X, established precisely because its Founder could not, in conscience, accept the new normal concocted at Vatican II: “And if you wish to know the real reason for my persistence, it is this. At the hour of my death, when Our Lord asks me: ‘What have you done with your episcopate, what have your done with your episcopal and priestly grace’ I do not want to hear from His lips the terrible words ‘You have helped to destroy the Church along with the rest of them.’ (Archbishop Lefebvre: Open Letter to Confused Catholics, p.163).

Comments invited…

 

USA Election: Pro-Life Priest Forced To Resign From Trump Advisory Boards…

.-  

Priests for Life national director Fr. Frank Pavone has resigned from advisory positions in the reelection campaign of President Donald Trump. The priest withdrew at the direction of Church authorities, he told CNA Friday.

“I’ve been requested by the competent ecclesiastical authority not to have an official title/position on the advisory boards. So, as a priest in good standing, I’ve followed that request,” Pavone told CNA July 24, in response to questions about his role in the Trump campaign.

In January, Pavone was appointed co-chair of the Pro-Life Voices for Trump coalition, and in April was announced as a member of the Catholics for Trump advisory board; the priest headlined that month an online kickoff event for the Trump Catholic group. Both groups are organized as part of the Trump campaign. Pavone was also a co-chair of the Trump pro-life coalition in 2016.

Pavone’s role in a political campaign was unusual for a priest. Members of the clergy require permission to “have an active part in political parties,” according to the Church’s canon law.

In April, Pavone told CNA that he did not believe himself to need permission for campaign involvement because he considered Trump’s reelection to be a matter of urgency. “I’m not going to ask anybody’s permission to go scream that the house is on fire,” he said at the time.

But on Friday, Pavone said that he had “been asking for permission to serve on these advisory boards” when he was “requested” to resign from them.

Pavone did not indicate what authorities had directed him to resign from the Trump campaign. In 2005 Pavone was incardinated in the Diocese of Amarillo, Texas, when he transferred to that diocese from the Archdiocese of New York with plans to begin a pro-life religious order of priests. Those plans did not materialize, and Pavone found himself at odds with Bishop Patrick Zurek, soon after the bishop was installed in 2008.

In 2011, the dispute between Pavone and Zurek became public, after the priest was recalled to the diocese and suspended by the bishop. Pavone appealed to the Vatican, and the suspension was eventually lifted in 2012.

In April, the priest told CNA that his relationship with Zurek remained rocky, describing communication with his bishop as “dysfunctional,” and saying that he was in the process of transferring to a new diocese.

The Diocese of Amarillo has not responded to repeated requests from CNA for clarity about Pavone’s political activity or ecclesiastical status, including requests to clarify whether he has faculties to minister publicly as a priest.

Pavone told CNA Friday that he remains incardinated in the Amarillo diocese, “but my transfer has been canonically completed to a different bishop who has good will toward me and my work.” He declined to name that diocese, saying that “the announcement of what diocese I’m in now is up to the same ecclesiastical authority to make.”

While Pavone is no longer part of the Catholics for Trump coalition, the group drew attention on Friday when it announced that author and YouTube commenter Taylor Marshall would join the Catholics for Trump advisory board.

Pavone’s role in the 2016 Trump campaign sparked considerable controversy in the Church. Ahead of the election the priest filmed a video at the Priests for Life headquarters, urging support for Trump. The video was filmed with the body of an aborted baby laid before Pavone on what appeared to be an altar.

Soon after video’s release, Zurek said he would open an investigation into the incident, calling it “against the dignity of human life” and “a desecration of the altar,” and adding that “the action and presentation of Father Pavone in this video is not consistent with the beliefs of the Catholic Church.”

While the diocese has not announced the results of that investigation, Pavone claims that he has been “cleared of the past complaints/investigations/disciplinary actions by the bishop of Amarillo. That chapter is closed.”

Pavone said that while he will no longer occupy a position in the Trump campaign “nothing has changed in my advocacy for the president, given that the Democrats do indeed pose a grave threat to ‘the rights of the Church’ and ‘the common good,’ a point I’ll be making constantly between now and November 3.”

“Any cleric who doesn’t see that point has his head in the sand or in a Democrat echo chamber,” the priest added.

Pavone is not the only priest in recent U.S. history to make headlines for involvement in an election.

In 2008, Chicago priest Fr. Michael Pfleger drew attention for appearing as part of a “People of Faith for Obama” coalition during then-Senator Barack Obama’s primary battle against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

Pfleger’s bishop, Cardinal Francis George, said at the time that “while a priest must speak to political issues that are also moral, he may not endorse candidates nor engage in partisan campaigning.”      Source

Comment: 

Is a priest who is promoting the pro-life message, and encouraging Catholics to vote for a candidate who will protect the unborn, the kind of political involvement [of clergy] prohibited in Canon Law?  

Ireland: Latest Blasphemy – Muslim Call to Prayer Permitted in Catholic Church… 

COUNTY MAYO, Ireland April 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of Tuam, Ireland, invited local Muslims to offer an Islamic prayer during a Mass last Friday that was live-streamed by the parish and broadcast over local radio

While the prayer was reportedly offered for an end to the coronavirus, Catholic sources have since confirmed that what was sung was, in fact, the “Adhan,” the Islamic “Call to Prayer” that asserts Islam’s supremacy over Christianity.

Father Stephen Farragher, parish priest of St. Patrick’s Church in Ballyhaunis, County Mayo, noted that “Friday is to the Muslim community what Sunday is to Christians” before inviting local Muslims Mohammed Cherbatji and Mohammed Rahmani to offer a prayer of “blessing” for an end to the pandemic and for all frontline healthcare workers.   Click here to read entire report…

Comment:

I know this kind of thing is happening all over the places but, still, I’m speechless – over to you…  

24/7: Face Masks Mandatory in Shops in England – Rebellion Looming (We Pray!) 

Comment:

The group “Keep Britain Free” organised the above protest.  Check them out here

I can’t recall KBF being mentioned in any TV news report – can you?  

Certainly, no-one can disagree with the concluding observation in their very good short video at the above link.  To slightly paraphrase … They have taken our liberties… Taking them back depends on you! 

But how easy is that going to be?  In TV news reports this morning marking the mandatory wearing of face masks in shops in England today (already mandatory in Scotland), there was an admission that Covid-19 has changed our way of life, and now we have to wear masks and keep the other restrictions “indefinitely”.   “Indefinitely”?  Really?  

As the news reports and video clips on YouTube drive home, the majority of people across the UK are continuing to accept the “new normal”, quite happily going along with every infringement on our personal freedoms, manifestly ignorant of the facts about everything from social distancing to face-coverings.  Keep Britain Free seems to be the only group providing a pushback.  Should we support them? 

China & Increasing Religious Persecution: Christian Symbols Banned In Homes…

In order to receive social welfare payments, citizens in several Chinese towns have to replace religious symbols with images of Chinese Communist Party leaders.

BEIJING, China, July 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Several towns in China are using their citizens’ status as social welfare recipients as a pretext to prohibit them from having Christian symbols in their homes. Anybody refusing to comply with the local government, and thus the governing Chinese Communist Party, would no longer be financially supported by the state.

“The government is trying to eliminate our belief and wants to become God instead of Jesus,” one Christian preacher told Bitter Winter, a magazine dedicated to reporting on human rights and religious freedom in China.

City officials were ordered “to remove crosses, religious symbols and images from the homes of people of faith who receive social welfare payments and replace them with portraits of Chairman Mao and President Xi Jinping,” wrote Bitter Winter.

One member of a Christian church recounted how city officials raided his house, tearing down all religious symbols and replacing them with a portrait of Chinese communist founding father Mao Zedong. “Impoverished religious households can’t receive money from the state for nothing—they must obey the Communist Party for the money they receive,” the person explained.

According to Bitter Winter, “The policy is being implemented in other localities across China.” In one locality, officials canceled “a disabled Christian’s minimum living subsidy and a monthly disability allowance of [roughly $14].”

His wife commented, “Officials told me that we would be treated as anti-Party elements if my husband and I continued attending worship services.”

“A Christian from Weihui city in the central province of Henan has been taking care of her two sons by herself after her husband died unexpectedly more than ten years ago,” Bitter Winter wrote. “She started receiving a minimum living allowance from the state in 2016. In early April, a village official ordered the woman to sign a statement renouncing her faith and destroy all Christian symbols in her house. Since she refused, her allowance was canceled.”

China is well-known for persecuting Christians, as well as other religious and ethnic minorities. In June, the U.S. State Department’s International Religious Freedom Report for 2019 dedicated 115 pages to China alone.

As the report points out, the Chinese constitution guarantees “freedom of religious belief but limits protections for religious practice to ‘normal religious activities’ and does not define ‘normal.’”

The report’s section on China lists countless examples of Catholics and other Christians being attacked for their faith by the government.

Father Paul Zhang, for example, was taken into custody after he “had refused to join the government-run [Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association]. According to AsiaNews, authorities stopped Zhang’s car, smashed the window, and beat him before taking him away. Another man in the car was also beaten but not taken into custody. Fifteen days prior to this event, police had raided a house in which Zhang was leading Mass. His whereabouts were unknown at year’s end.”

One year ago in July, “the Central Institute of Socialism in Fujian Province organized a course on the work of the Catholic Church in the province.”

Several dozen priests who are members of the state-run imitation of the Catholic Church participated. “The lessons and activities centered on the theme of ‘guiding the Catholic Church to follow a path conforming to socialist society.’ AsiaNews noted the course seemed to focus almost entirely on political doctrine with very little mention of Christian teachings.”

The report also mentioned Cardinal Joseph Zen, the former bishop of Hong Kong, and his criticism of the secret deal between the Vatican and the communist Chinese government.   

“Similar to the previous year, neither side provided details of the provisional agreement, such as how the Holy See and the government would make decisions regarding appointment of bishops,” the report pointed out.

Paradoxically, Chinese bishop Vincenzo Guo Xijin, “an underground bishop recognized by the Holy See, remained in a subordinate position under Bishop Zhan Silu, who was originally ordained without Holy See approval. The Holy See had previously excommunicated Zhan, a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, but in December 2018 allowed him to replace Guo as bishop of the Mindong Diocese in Fujian Province.”

“Zhan was one of the seven individuals whom the Holy See recognized as bishops under the 2018 provisional agreement,” the report added. “Police had detained Guo, who had been appointed by the Holy See, earlier in 2018 for his refusal to jointly lead Easter services with Zhan, who at the time was not recognized by the Holy See.”

Zen recently commented on the fact that Pope Francis, on July 5, chose not to speak out regarding the tensions between China and Hong Kong, even though the prepared remarks given to journalists beforehand contained a passage on that very issue.

“I have seen the text, which is very mild, in no way offensive to the Chinese government,” the cardinal pointed out. “Some say maybe the Holy Father thought it was better not to say [something], or some say he may have received some word from the Chinese Embassy in Italy.”

“It’s not an isolated episode,” he clarified. “It’s already a long-standing policy of the Vatican not to offend the Chinese government.”   Source

Comment…

We, in the UK, are marching towards totalitarian government;  reflect on how quickly – almost overnight –  the populations of the four nations fell into line, unquestioningly obeying the Government’s restrictions on our civil and religious liberties, and all in the name of a virus which is harmless to the majority of those who become infected.   So, it doesn’t seem beyond the realm of possibility that we will – perhaps very soon – face the kind of further intrusion into our religious liberty that is normal in China.  For us, of course, it would be “the new normal” – like being “masked up” in shops and on public transport. Indefinitely. That’s how the “new normal” becomes …well… normal.  Permanent. 

 If, therefore, we find the screws on our religious freedom tightening further, all as part of the “new normal”, where would we look for help? Clearly not the Vatican, not under the present pontiff.  And the ongoing co-operation of the clergy with the Government’s control of the Church suggests that the laity can go whistle if we expect any fightback from that quarter.  Or is this a worry too far?  Conspiracy theory territory?    It is happening in China, all right, but here? Never. But remember, at one time the only people we saw on our TV screens wearing face masks were Chinese people living in… Communist China.  Just a thought…  

Excommunication: Archbishop Lefebvre & Bishop Pat Buckley… Spot the Difference!

As promised in our July Newsletter – which you can download from our website here –  we are launching a brief discussion on the matter of two prominent 20th century excommunications: that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Founder of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) and Bishop Pat Buckley…  A brief overview of each situation follows: 

Archbishop Lefebvre…

From the SSPX website…

Following the repeated requests of several young men seeking a traditional priestly formation, Archbishop Lefebvre opened a new seminary in Econe, Switzerland. The local ordinary, Bishop Francois Charriere, gave his blessing for this work, and on November 1, 1970 the Priestly Society of St. Pius X was born with the approval of the Church.

A brief account of the history of the SSPX can be read here. One detail, however, should be added to that general account, as it pertains primarily to Archbishop Lefebvre’s involvement in the Coetus Internationalis Patrum. During the Second Vatican Council, an important friendship developed between Marcel Lefebvre and Antonio de Castro Mayer, bishop of Campos (Brazil). These two shared ideas at the various Coetus functions and kept in contact long after the close of the council. They both refused to implement the modernist teachings of Vatican II and in 1983 jointly authored an open letter to the pope lamenting the numerous errors which seemed to infect Rome. When Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four new bishops in 1988, Bishop de Castro Mayer assisted as co-consecrator.  To read more, click here

From The Remnant website…

Sadly, in the current catastrophe that is the Post-Conciliar Church, some blinded men, instead of joining the fight against the heresy, apostasy, and de facto schism around us, insist on melodramatically condemning, with the most condescending and arrogant invective, the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Although any excommunication that was previously levied against the living bishops of the SSPX has long since been remitted, some hardened Neo-Catholics insist that Abp. Lefebvre himself remains perpetually excommunicated, one Neo-Catholic priest even going so far as to presume his damnation. Thus the same Neo-Catholics who tell us that the Church’s perennial teachings on religious liberty, ecumenism, and collegiality are confined to past times and changeable, treat a 1988 letter from a pope as if its infallibility ranked somewhere between Dogma and Holy Writ.

The 1988 letter I am referring to, of course, is John Paul II’s Ecclesia Dei adflictaTwenty-six years later, Neo-Catholics cling to this letter as it represents, in their minds anyway, the one infallible document that ensures Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre can never be rehabilitated or declared a Saint in the future. As usual, the irony of the Neo-Catholics, on the one hand preaching the Mass of Pius V is changeable at the whim of future popes, while on the other hand preaching John Paul II’s excommunication is certainly valid and binding for all time, escapes them entirely.  To read the entire article on The Remnant website, click here

Bishop Pat Buckley…

Google Father or Bishop Pat Buckley and the description “rebel priest” comes up… Here, in his own words, is why he was dismissed from his parish

 

Later, Fr Buckley was consecrated a bishop, as reported in the Irish Times: 

“The rebel cleric, Bishop Pat Buckley, has excommunicated himself from the Catholic Church by being consecrated as a bishop, a Hierarchy spokesman has said.

The church spokesman said the ordination of Bishop Buckley by the Tridentine bishop, Dr Michael Cox, was “valid but unlawful” (under Canon law).”  To read rest of this report click  here

Comment: 

The adjective often used to describe both bishops is “rebel”.  Archbishop Lefebvre is well known for his work to preserve Catholic Tradition against the innovations following Vatican II, while Bishop Buckley is well known for his dissent from Catholic teachings, such as the prohibition on divorce and remarriage.  Archbishop Lefebvre fought to keep the Church within Catholic Tradition, while Bishop Buckley seeks to achieve changes in the Church which will meet the perceived needs of contemporary Catholics living in a “liberal” society.  

So, check out the headline – IS there any difference between the two excommunications?   

Covid-Compliant Clergy Doing Violence To God’s Will – Severe Judgment Awaits…

Martin Blackshaw (aka blogger, Athanasius) writes…

Given that the Covid-19 crisis and lockdown are demonstrably fabricated, constitutionally unprecedented, counter-cultural, globally oppressive, repressive, suppressive and depressive, it was only natural that Catholics should look to the Church, in her clergy, to raise the voice of moral objection and resistance.

What we have witnessed instead, with no little incredulity and scandal, is a clergy which has largely complied silently and submissively with unjust government legislation; first in suppressing the Mass and the Sacraments for 4 months, and now with Church re-opening rules that are, frankly, an affront to Almighty God and a violation of conscience for so many Catholics.

In fine, our clergy have turned the Church, the House of God, the House of Faith, into a House of fear and forbiddance, the very antithesis of Our Saviour’s invitation: “Come to Me all ye who labour and are heavy burdened, and I will give you rest”. (Matthew 11, 28).

Surely this shocking clerical capitulation to abusive civil authority renders a good many bishops and priests worthy of that Gospel condemnation of Our Lord: “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men: for you yourselves do not enter in and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter…” (Matthew 23, 13).

Before expanding further on this great betrayal of our times, it is first necessary to recap on some very basic, easily obtainable, facts about Covid-19.

Fact 1. This virus has never been correctly isolated and identified using the gold standard method of science, namely, ‘Koch’s Postulates’. Rather, world governments have simply accepted the flawed PCR science of Communist China, a notoriously unreliable method that renders all subsequent human testing suspect and inadmissible.  

Fact 2. 99.7% of the global population is relatively unaffected by this virus. Of the remaining 0.3% of global humanity, only a tiny 0.04% of the Scottish population is said to have died with or of it. In other words, we are dealing with a virus that is barely comparable with a bad flu year.

Fact 3. Professor Neil Ferguson, the architect of national lockdown, has since been discredited along with his apocalyptic computer model predicting millions of Covid-19 deaths.

Fact 4. There is no definitive scientific evidence underpinning the imposition of “social distancing”, face masks and hand sanitisers. Quite the contrary, “social distancing” was plagiarised from a hypothesis written many years ago by a college student and face masks have been shown to be more dangerous than helpful to health.

Fact 5. National quarantine of the healthy as well as the sick during a viral outbreak is unprecedented in world history, it runs contrary to human reason and sound governance.

Fact 6. Secular authorities are subordinate to the authority of the Church, not the other way around. Hence any State law that declares the public cessation of holy Mass under any pretext offends against the divine law, as do clergy who obey men rather than God.

Suffice it to say that by these few facts, and there are many others, we can easily determine the two elements necessary to render the present imposition of State Covid legislation null and void in respect to both the Church and society. These are that the legislation is irrational and contrary to the eternal law.


Regarding the eternal law, the Third Commandment of the Decalogue obliges all under pain of mortal sin to keep holy the Sabbath day. The Church teaches that the fulfilment of this obligation consists primarily, though not exclusively, in assisting at Holy Mass on Sundays and Holy Days.

Throughout history the Church has witnessed many plagues and viruses, some with a devastating cost in human lives that makes Covid-19 look like a case of the sniffles.

To give just a few examples from antiquity through the middle ages up to more modern times: The Antonine plague of A.D.165 is estimated to have killed around 5 million people throughout the Roman empire. The plague of Cyprian (A.D.280), so-called after St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, who thought it the end of the world, was killing 5000 people a day at its height in Rome. The plague of Justinian (A.D. 541), named after the Byzantine emperor of the time, is estimated to have killed up to 10% of the world’s population. The Black Death of 1346 is said to have wiped out half the population of Europe. The Cocoliztli epidemic of 1545 killed 15 million inhabitants of Mexico and Central America. The Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918 is estimated to have killed 100 million worldwide.

For brevity’s sake I have left out numerous lesser historical plagues whose death tolls have varied from around 100, 000 to 1 million, against which latter number Covid-19 does not even compare.

Suffice it to say that through the worst plagues in history all Churches remained open without restriction while priests ministered bravely to their faithful, including the sick and the dying, filled with supernatural faith and divine charity. Indeed, it is recorded in antiquity that the terrified pagans marvelled at the selfless charity of the Christians during times of plague.

With this in mind we come to a comparison with today’s clergy, not to mention a very large number of faithful, who, having approved the lockdown of the House of God for 4 months, now humiliate the Church further with a sanitised faith that is a parody of Catholicism and a mockery of the spirit of the early Christians and holy martyrs.   

Against this appalling capitulation in the face of evil, we read in the 1921 edition of Spirago-Clarke’s Imprimatured “The Catechism Explained”: “The Church is, in its own department, absolutely independent of the State, for Christ left the teaching and government of His Church to the Apostles and their successors, not to any temporal sovereign. Hence the State has no claim to dictate to Christians what they are to believe and reject, nor to instruct priests what they are to preach, nor how and when they are to give the sacraments, say Mass, etc. Such interference has always been resented by the Church…”

Pope John XXIII expanded on this teaching, writing: “laws and decrees passed in contravention of the moral order, and hence of the divine will, can have no binding force in conscience, since “it is right to obey God rather than men.”…As St. Thomas teaches, “In regard to the second proposition, we maintain that human law has the rationale of law in so far as it is in accordance with right reason, and as such it obviously derives from eternal law. A law which is at variance with reason is to that extent unjust and has no longer the rationale of law. It is rather an act of violence.” (Peace on Earth, 1963, 51).

Even in the new Catechism we read as follows:

“Authority does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself. It must not behave in a despotic manner, but must act for the common good as a moral force based on freedom and a sense of responsibility: A human law has the character of law to the extent that it accords with right reason, and thus derives from the eternal law. Insofar as it falls short of right reason it is said to be an unjust law, and thus has not so much the nature of law as of a kind of violence.” (#1902)

Catholic Social Teaching St. Augustine: “An unjust law is no law at all.” (On Free Choice Of The Will, Book 1, § 5)

Authority is exercised legitimately only when it seeks the common good of the group concerned and if it employs morally licit means to attain it. If rulers were to enact unjust laws or take measures contrary to the moral order, such arrangements would not be binding in conscience. In such a case “authority breaks down completely and results in shameful abuse”. (#1903)

The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” “We must obey God rather than men.” (#2242).

In Pope Leo XIII’s June 1881 Encyclical on Government Authority (Diuturnum Illud), we read:

The one only reason which men have for not obeying is when anything is demanded of them which is openly repugnant to the natural or the divine law, for it is equally unlawful to command and to do anything in which the law of nature or the will of God is violated…”

Demonic Intelligence…

As already clearly illustrated, the Covid-19 crisis is fabricated and the response to it is contrary to human reason, human freedom and the eternal law. Hence bishops, clergy and faithful who have in any way complied with the present evil, not recognising the demonic intelligence behind the initial suppression of the Mass followed by re-opening rules that include forbidding Holy Communion on the tongue, replacing holy water with sanitiser, taping off pews to restrict numbers, leper-like distancing with infantile face masks, including perspex riot guards, a moratorium on kissing statues, lighting votive candles and moving around the church, will certainly not escape the just judgment of God for their faithlessness, having shown themselves more concerned with the health of the mortal body than with the health of the immortal soul.

Comments invited…   

SNP: Incredible Hate Crime Law – Free to Disagree Campaign in Scotland…

Comment: 

Here’s a commentator from Youtube on the above interview…

Joke of the day: There was an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman who….. What? I’m under arrest?

Laugh while  you may but the points made in the above interview should be sufficient to ensure that the SNP are never again voted into high office. A more authoritarian government does not exist outside of the known totalitarian regimes such as North Korea – a point made in the interview. 

Catholics who have voted  for such an obviously Marxist Party in the past, such as the Spokesman for the Scottish Bishops (Peter Kearney), surely need to think again. Or do you disagree?  Maybe you think love of country (i.e. a “nationalist” type of love) is more important that love of God and Morality?  

To find our more about the Free to Disagree Campaign click here

Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel… Anthony’s Operation Underway – Pray! 

Editor writes… 

Thank you to all who have been praying for my 14 year old Great-Nephew, Anthony, as he as been preparing to undergo a spinal operation.  He is now on the operating table (since just after 9.am) and the operation is scheduled to take five hours.  Please remember him in your prayers on this very special Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.  

Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for Anthony!   

Our Lady of Lourdes, Health of the Sick, pray for him!