Coronavirus Cure: Should Catholics Refuse Forced or Unethical Vaccine?

Comment: 

A reader emailed over the weekend to express concerns about the possibility of a vaccine being produced using material from aborted babies, and she included the following extract from an email reply from an SSPX priest, to an enquiry about this subject [note: she was not the immediate recipient of the email from the priest, but a friend forwarded it to her, and she sent it on to me…]:

“…Voluntarily using a vaccine made from aborted babies is a material, remote cooperation in an abortion. The principle of double effect shows that this is a grave sin…”    [A priest of the Society of St Pius X – SSPX]

On those grounds, then, that we would be co-operating in abortion, Catholics should, surely, refuse the vaccine if it has been made using material from aborted babies. 

There are other issues, too, arising from the possibility of the Government requiring or forcing us to have the vaccine…

The following extract from The New American examines this issue. While referring to America, its thesis is also applicable to the UK:

Conditioning, Then Control

A first step toward implementing a vaccine-based ID scheme is conditioning people to accept the idea that they will need to prove their vaccination and health status before being allowed by government to engage in any activities that, heretofore, were exercised without restriction by a free people. This is perfect for the age of COVID-19, when mainstream media organs and government “experts” have worked overtime to instill extreme levels of fear into the American people, forcing them into what amounts to house arrest to fight the “war” on the virus. Now, to regain freedom, it has been suggested that people will need to prove that they have gained immunity to the virus. To this end, Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and a key member of the Trump administration’s coronavirus task force, admitted that the federal government is considering forcing citizens to use coronavirus immunity cards.
“You know, that’s possible,” Fauci told CNN. “I mean, it’s one of those things that we talk about when we want to make sure that we know who the vulnerable people are and [are] not,” he continued. “This is something that’s being discussed. I think it might actually have some merit, under certain circumstances.”   Click here to read entire article 

Share your thoughts about whether or not you would (a) accept a vaccine made from material taken from aborted babies, despite clear Catholic teaching about the immorality of doing so and (b) whether or not you would refuse a forced vaccine – that is, if the Government requires us to take the vaccine and/or decides to link having the vaccine with our freedom to engage in previously unrestricted activities.  

Finally, if there are statements from any UK bishops – or from Pope  Francis – on the concerns surrounding the ethics of a Coronavirus vaccine, please let us know in the comments below.  So far, the US Bishop in the video above seems to be the only one expressing concerns on the record – in other words, he seems to be the only Bishop proclaiming Catholic morality in the matter of the proposed vaccination programme.  If that changes, let’s record it for posterity.  Not that posterity has ever done anything for us 😀 

Are We Morally Bound To Obey Coronavirus Restrictions / Laws? 

Comment:

The Catechism of the Catholic Church on the duty of citizens towards the authorities in civil society:

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”:
When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.
  (# 2242)

The question here, therefore, is this:  are the Governments of the UK overstepping their authority by requiring us to accept some very serious restrictions on our personal liberty, in the name of “saving lives” – when by all accounts, the majority of those who become infected with Covid-19 recover from it? A relative of mine believes he had the virus back in January;  he was sure it was simply flu, but because it was the worst-ever flu attack he’d ever experienced, he decided to visit his doctor.  He said the doctor asked him “a strange question” – had he been in China recently!  The answer was “no” and that is where that conversation ended.  This relative – who is very elderly, in his 80s – made a full recovery.  

There is concern, therefore, that perhaps the lockdown restrictions are not only unnecessary (who quarantines the healthy?) but also too stringently enforced. The full force of the law…Really?  People stopped in the street, or pulled over in their car by the police, and asked to explain why they are outside of their home, destination etc.  Do we have to answer? Should we pay any fines imposed?  Is this a conscience issue, or would we be doing wrong to flout the State?  

English Bishops’ Advisor, Convicted Thief/LGBT Activist, Played Key Role in Decision to Close Churches… 

English bishops’ senior health advisor is a convicted thief and lifelong LGBT activist  – Jim McManus [a Scot] was awarded a Vatican medal in 2011 despite his criminal conviction and LGBT advocacy.

HERTFORDSHIRE, England, May 13, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A man who helped lobby the UK government on behalf of the Catholic bishops to close their churches to private prayer is a convicted thief and lifelong LGBT activist who once left his Catholic faith and served as a Protestant minister.

A LifeSite investigation has uncovered that Jim G. McManus, 54, the Vice-Chair for the Healthcare Reference Group for the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW), is James Gough McManus, the former minister of an LGBT church who was convicted in 1999 of 11 counts of theft against Northern Counties Trust, a HIV/AIDS charity he reportedly helped to found. He also was named in a legal investigation into his role at the National Health Service’s Barking and Dagenham Primary Care Trust.

After LifeSiteNews contacted McManus about these and other aspects of his multifaceted career, he did not respond personally. Instead we received an email from his solicitor Shubha Nath. An article at the Barking and Dagenham Post about McManus’ 2010 trial was also taken down. (At time of publishing this article, it was still available on Google cache here, but that has now been removed. LifeSite has saved a copy here.)

In late March the CBCEW explained that McManus played a key role in convincing the government to close churches after guidance from the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government directed that “places of worship should remain open for solitary prayer” during the current coronavirus lockdown. In addition to serving as Vice-Chair of the CBCEW Healthcare Reference Group, McManus is the Director of Public Health for the Hertfordshire County Council.

“Professor [sic] Jim McManus has spoken with a senior civil servant and it was quite clear they just had not thought through the issues of infection and security of churches and when he made these points clear, they were appalled and agreed they had made a mistake,” the Archdiocese of Westminster stated.

In an April 1 article on the church closures, published in The Tablet, McManus explains that he had attended a briefing with U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson less than a week before the churches were closed.    Click here to read the rest of this bombshell report…

Comment: 

Jim McManus is from Fife, in Scotland. In 1985 he was the Secretary of the Scottish Homosexual Rights Group, and he has been a devoted LGBT activist for, as they say, ever.   But if you think that might have held him back in his advance within the Church, think again.  The New Morality, like the New Everthing Else is embedded in the Church in this part of the world.  Thus, this lifelong LGBT activist and convicted thief has risen to the giddy heights of being an advisor to the English Bishops, influential enough to be responsible for convincing the UK Government that – in accordance with the Bishops’ wishes – churches should be closed down as part of the Coronavirus restrictions.  A real Prince Judas.   Share your thoughts – with  a mind to your next Confession…   

SSPX: Church Militant Guilty of Peddling Sleaze – Catholic Truth


       

Michael Voris, Church Militant

Editor, Catholic Truth, writes…

Our blogger, Athanasius, has now studied the recent articles about the SSPX published by the American organisation known as Church Militant (CM), which were brought to our attention recently. 

To describe those articles as “sleaze” is an understatement, by any standards. Their most recent piece can be read here but we warn readers that there are descriptions of graphic sexual deviancy published therein, and so, since Athanasius’s article below is perfectly understandable without the need to read the CM articles, we do not recommend visiting the link; we supply it only in the interests of necessary documentation for those who require to see the writings at source. 

A Response to the Church Militant Reports on Former SSPX Priests Accused of Homosexual Abuse…

Having read the sexual abuse trilogy produced by Church Militant against the SSPX, one question above all remains to be answered: Has this been a noble cause for justice or an exercise in vengeance?

The first step to answering this question is to ask another… Given that this handful of accused homosexual abuser priests are no longer in the SSPX, and given the new, very strict guidelines that all religious communities are obliged to follow concerning child safety, is there anything constructive to be gained from this trilogy?

The answer is clearly and emphatically no;   there are no young men or children presently at risk in the SSPX and no predators presently at large within its priestly structure of 500 – 600 clerics. Hence, it seems more likely that this is a set of historical accounts written up with a view to doing more harm than good.

I think anyone with a knowledge of Church Militant’s very deep seated hatred for the SSPX over many years will be hard pushed to imagine that justice was ever the motive here, bearing in mind that Michael Voris is himself a former sexual pervert who, unjustly in my opinion, was forced to admit as much in public before others revealed his past sins with a view to discrediting him.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Founder, SSPX

I mention this because it seems strange to me that a man who had himself suffered such injustice would be so ready to reveal the sins, or perceived sins, of SSPX superiors, not even sparing the holy memory of the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre.

That superiors within the SSPX may have failed in the past to adequately address predator priest issues is sadly all too familiar in the Church. How many times have we heard of superiors failing to take appropriate action against abusers for fear of scandalising the faithful, or simply because they were negligent due to incredulity, failing to believe what the victims’ parents themselves were apparently failing to believe from their own children’s accounts? Sadly, it is a very common theme.

Whatever the reason for past failures in the SSPX, scandalous as they are, it is fairly certain that the superiors themselves were not sexually deviant men intent on enabling abusive priests. At worst they were irresponsible, perhaps even criminally so, God alone knows. No one will escape the divine justice, that’s for sure, although, thankfully, God judges by intent and not by perception.

Speaking of which, I am fairly sure that Church Militant did not intend by its graphic revelations to enable paedophiles, as I suspect its detailed descriptions may well do. I am no psychiatrist but it seems to me that such deviants may be drawn like magnets to stories revealing graphic accounts of child sexual abuse, if only to pleasure their sick minds with whatever images the Church Militant accounts conjure up for them.

Has anyone thought about this? Do these people not realise that the Church has a very good reason for referring simply to impure acts rather than detailing those acts in a graphic way? But then I suppose when the end is vengeance you really have to be graphic enough in detail to elicit an emotional response from readers, even if some happen to be deviants whose emotional response is altogether different from that which was intended! Graphic details of child sexual abuse are for courts of law, not for public platforms where anyone can read them and be incited to offend.

Worse still is the possibility that weaker souls could be lost to the faith as a result of such revelations, as happened en masse in Ireland when the secular media reported its stories on clerical abuse and the failures of superiors, demanding severe and immediate punishment for all who failed.


I wonder if the authors at Church Militant have considered that if just one immortal soul is lost as a result of the utterly depressing and demoralising stories they have published, stories that will result in no natural or supernatural good whatsoever, then there is every possibility that they themselves may lose their souls as a result.

Had children still been at risk in the SSPX then there would have been every good reason for Church Militant to highlight the fact, but that’s not the case and they know it.

So what is the motive? Well, given that Our Lord suffered the ultimate injustice in this world, even to the point of being betrayed by one of His own, the motive is clearly not justice in the Catholic sense that teaches us that divine justice is unavoidable, infallible and far stricter. No, this is vengeance, a desire to do harm to a priestly fraternity which, while it has suffered its share of “filth in the Church”, to quote Pope Benedict XVI, is nevertheless in general a good and holy institution founded by God through His servant Archbishop Lefebvre in a time of great crisis in the Church.

If it were not for the SSPX there would be no Traditional Mass in the Church today, no Traditional priesthood, no Traditional doctrine, all would have been swept aside by now. Had Church Militant included this vital objective observation, along with a balancing reminder that the greater majority of SSPX priests are good and holy priests, then I might have been inclined to believe that the intention is to serve some form of natural justice. But no, it is a biased piece of sleaze reporting that benefits no one other than bitter people and perhaps the aforementioned paedophiles who may enjoy, if such is the word, the filth CM has printed for their deviant pleasure.

That natural justice for genuine victims of clerical abuse within the SSPX or anywhere else may yet be possible, is for the proper legal authorities to assess, for they, not Church Militant, are solely empowered to investigate and report in such criminal matters.

In the meantime, anticipating the response of Church Militant and anyone foolish enough to trust its motives, I lay down the following challenge:

Show me one good to come from this sleaze story that will truly benefit victims, the Church or any individual soul, naturally or supernaturally, which could be said to equate with true Catholic justice.

That’s all I ask, just one concrete proof that this was about true Catholic justice and not the secular worldly parody of justice that convicts without trial and demands public humiliation for all who are perceived to have failed in their duty to protect.  The author of the above article is Martin Blackshaw, who lives in Scotland  –  aka our blogger, Athanasius. 

Comment:

 The traditional calendar, names today, Friday 8th May, as the Feast of the Apparition of St Michael the Archangel. Our editorial comment on this subject concludes, therefore, with the recitation of the prayer to  St Michael, which we suggest be offered for Michael Voris and his team, i.e. all those involved in the work of his organisation, Church Militant…

Holy Michael, Archangel, defend us in the day of battle.
Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of he Devil;
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray,
And do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Hosts,
by the power of God, cast down into Hell, Satan, and all wicked spirits,
Who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

 

Is it a sin to break lockdown rules? 

Comment: 

Shelley Luther, the salon owner in the above video told the Judge in court that she had broken the rules because she had to feed her family.  He was adamant that the rules  had to be followed, no exceptions.   7 days in jail and a $7,000 fine were imposed, with an additional $1,000 fine added for every day that her salon remains open.   We don’t know Shelley’s religion, but if she’s a Catholic, should she be going to Confession, with her sin of “disobedience” writ large on the list?  

The Truth About The Lockdown… 

Watching the totally compliant UK population accepting the need for the ongoing lockdown – that is, the highly questionable (to say the least) removal of our civil liberties – it strikes me that it would be useful for us all to be armed with some key facts and figures  to present to people who accept the Government line without question.   That is to say, the overwhelming majority of the population. Unlike the situation in the USA, where there is some fightback from rebellious members of the public, and they are lucky enough to have Fox News where the other side of the story is aired, we are subject to unremitting brainwashing here in the UK.  Trying to alert others to the fact of a creeping totalitarianism is like trying to convince a toddler to eat his greens first, then the chocolate.  They just don’t see what is happening, and any suggestion that what is happening is not in our best interests, brings shakes of the heads and knowing looks that say “Ah, so you’re a conspiracy nut, eh?”  

Thus, knowing that our blogger, Athanasius, is currently working on a number of articles on the subject, I very cheekily asked him if he would mind throwing some key facts together for us to discuss on the blog.  He agreed, without hesitation, so below, find some crucial information which will throw light on what lies behind the readiness of the Government of the UK (and the devolved administrations) to command us to stay in our homes, granting permission for us to go out only for necessary food, medicine and exercise.

Anyone who questions these new rules is regarded as someone who needs help – in a Communist-style “re-education” camp –  because the majority are not simply tolerating this lockdown, but positively embracing it – and, according to reports today, the majority want it to continue for a year. They may well get their wish – and then some…

So, below, check out the facts about this lockdown – seems that there is one man behind the whole thing… Professor Neil Ferguson.  Take a look and then share your thoughts on his culpability – or perhaps not.  IS he saving us all from ourselves, and from this supposedly deadly virus?  Or is something else going on here? 

Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London

His computer generated model on Covid-19 predicted 520,000 dead in the UK and 2.2 million dead in the U.S. unless the UK government committed to a radical policy change from “herd immunity” to national lockdown. Dr. Anthony Fauci in the U.S. was influenced by Ferguson’s model and in turn influenced Donald Trump to alter course from herd immunity to national lockdown. (1)

Ferguson’s model hasn’t been published, so not peer reviewed or scrutinised by other experts. It is his own analysis using his own data and writing his own computer code based on an old model from 2009. The world’s economies closed down as a result. Incredible!

2001 – Ferguson Foot & Mouth disease model – Predicted 150,000 UK deaths. The government culled 6 million healthy cattle in the country at a cost of billions of pounds and the devastation of rural Britain. The ultimate death count from Foot & Mouth was only 200. (2)

2009 – Ferguson Swine Flu model – Predicted 65,000 deaths in the UK, as related by then-Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson. Ferguson also predicted up to 4 million possible deaths globally. Requested government to close schools and churches which was declined, but government bought panic loads of vaccines that cost the tax payer £1.24 billion. The final death toll from Swine Flu in the UK was only 457, and between 123,000 – 200,000 globally. (3)

Dr. Anthony Fauci – Addressing attendees at a Georgetown University speech in 2017, he predicted that the incoming Trump Administration would “almost certainly face challenges with infectious diseases”, adding “But also there will be a surprise outbreak…” (4)

In a medical paper co-authored by Fauci and three colleagues and published February 28, 2020, we find this statement: “…If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza…” (5)

Fox News has just run a story objecting to YouTube, owned by Google, removing a local American news programme from its platform citing Covid-19 “misinformation” as its reason. The programme included claims by doctors in the U.S. that they were, among other things, being coerced into altering Coronavirus death stats by including non-related deaths with Covid-19. The video of that news programme received millions of views before being removed. (6)

 

Footnotes

1. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01003-6
https://www.technocracy.news/2020/?print=print-search (scroll about two thirds down the page to get to the article on Ferguson)
https://www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4?r=US&IR=T
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/coronavirus-whos-who-on-secret-scientific-group-advising-uk-government-sage (Again, scroll down to Ferguson).

2. https://www.technocracy.news/2020/?print=print-search (Same article as at note 1)
3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/may/12/swine-flu-report-pandemic-predicted
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jul/16/swine-flu-cases-rise-britain
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jul/20/shut-schools-swine-flu
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21194090
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/08/treated-sars-ebola-swine-flu-need-know-coronavirus/ (Save time reading the entire article, here’s the relevant passage: “Ultimately H1N1 led to nearly 460 deaths in Britain but seemed to particularly affect children and pregnant women. The number of people hospitalised was actually very small but even then it put hospitals under pressure. At one point every paediatric critical care bed was in use.”)
4. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8188429/Dr-Fauci-revealed-fears-surprise-outbreak-three-YEARS-pandemic.html
5. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387
6. https://www.foxnews.com/media/tucker-carlson-youtube-coronavirus-censorship-science