Is Pontiff Contradicting Scripture When He Warns of a Second Great Flood? 

ROME — Pope Francis has warned of the possibility of a second great flood, like that of Noah’s time, if humanity fails to address global warming.
Ed: well, that’s not what it says in the Bible. God explicitly rules out destroying the world by flood again, and even sets His rainbow in the sky as a reminder of this agreement – this covenant –  between Him and the earth (Genesis 9:13)    

“God’s wrath is directed against injustice, against Satan,” the pope states in a book titled Of Vices and Virtues due for release Tuesday. “It is  directed  against evil, not that which derives from human weakness, but evil of Satanic inspiration: the corruption generated by Satan.”
Ed: so Satan doesn’t use our human weakness to tempt us to sin – for which we, individually, are  ultimately responsible?  Somebody should have told CS Lewis  – would have saved him wasting time writing that book about the Devil doing exactly that…

“God’s wrath is meant to bring justice, to ‘clean up,’” the pontiff declares in an advance excerpt of the book published by the Italian daily Corriere della Sera Sunday.

“The Bible says that the flood is the result of God’s wrath,” Francis continues. “It is a figure of God’s wrath, who according to the Bible has seen too many bad things and decides to obliterate humanity.”

“The biblical flood, according to experts, is a mythical tale,” the pope states, parenthetically adding his hope that no one writes that “the pope says the Bible is a myth.”

“But myth is a form of knowledge,” he says. “The flood is a historical tale, archaeologists say, because they found traces of a flood in their excavations.”
Ed: oh, well, if archaeologists say it, it must be true.  Actually, one of the gems I’ve never forgotten from my visit to the Holy Land many years ago now, is this:  that every single archaeological discovery made in the Holy Land confirms what we read in Scripture.  To date, I’ve yet to hear the opposite. For a minute there, I thought that was about to change with Papa Francis bandying around that favourite term of the pseudo-scripture scholars- “myth”.   Thankfully, it seems his rambling has led him to the correct conclusion, for once. History has been made, she said, tongue-in-cheek…

“A great flood, perhaps due to a rise in temperature and the melting of the glaciers, is what will happen now if we continue along the same path,” the pope warns.
Ed: if only you would display half as much faith in divine revelation – including  the account of the Great Flood – as you do to Greta Thunberg’s nonsense, you would know that God has promised never to destroy the world by water again – Read Genesis 9:1-17.  Soon. 

“God unleashed his wrath, but he saw a righteous one, took him and saved him,” he says. “The story of Noah demonstrates that God’s wrath is also  alvific.”   

The pope’s new book recounts conversations between the pontiff and Father Marco Pozza, chaplain of the prison of Padua in the north of Italy.

Francis has made care for the environment and opposition to climate change a hallmark of his almost eight-year pontificate, taking to task world leaders who have shown too little resolve in their battle against global warming.
Ed: pity that isn’t his remit.  His remit is to preach Christ, and Him Crucified – not to peddle pseudo-scientific propaganda.

He said last year that it is “evident” that climate change is to blame for a number of humanity’s social ills, as well as disrupting the balance of nature.
Ed: gimme strength.

“It is evident that climate change not only upsets the balance of nature, but causes poverty and hunger, affects the most vulnerable, and sometimes forces them to leave their land,” the pope told a group gathered in the Vatican.
Ed: as intimated above, if this pope would spend half the time reading solid Catholic literature – starting with the Book of Genesis  – that he spends reading climate propaganda, we might begin to hear something from him that points the world to God. Right now, he comes across as merely another climate activist, thus bringing the papal office into disrepute. 

The pope’s audience consisted of participants in a meeting of members of the Laudato Sì community, named after the pontiff’s 2015 encyclical letter on the environment, which bears the same name.
Ed: preaching to the already converted, then. That’s fine.  Keep it that way – the rest of us are not remotely interested. 

“We need a real will to tackle the root causes of the ongoing climate upheavals,” Francis insisted. “Generic commitments are not enough — words, words.”     Source
Ed: well, er… isn’t that what you’ve just done – thrown out some more words, words, words…  What do you want us all to do – stop attending churches (if they ever reopen) to save electricity?  Cancel all choirs, to avoid polluting the air?  What then? 

Comments invited…   

The Vexatious Vaccine Versus Catholic Integrity – SSPX “Lifeboat” Leaking…

Martin Blackshaw, aka blogger Athanasius, has penned another very strong correction to the Pope Francis-inspired permission for Catholics to take the abortion-tainted Covid-19 vaccines.

During the current diabolical disorientation within the Church – otherwise fondly known as the Barque of Peter – many Catholics, seeking liturgical relief, took refuge in the  “lifeboat” provided by the Society of St Pius X (SSPX).

Returning to the traditional Latin Mass and Sacraments, plus the reassurance that the Society preaches only that which is found in Catholic Tradition, has kept a lot of us afloat, this past half-century. It is, therefore, hugely disappointing and, indeed, shocking, to discover that the  “lifeboat” is leaking – that the SSPX has decided,  for example,  to go along with the Vatican line  on the Covid-19 vaccines.

Having discussed our concerns about this already here, we feel the need to return to the topic, given the ongoing confusion and unrest felt by many lay people, including those long devoted to the SSPX.  Martin  Blackshaw writes…

Background

Most of us, I’m sure, could never have imagined just one year ago that in as short a period as 12 months the global economy would be smashed to pieces, millions would be put out of work, Christians would be denied their fundamental right to the public worship of God and the vast majority of the citizens on earth would be deprived of their natural freedom and liberties. Yet, in the name of a respiratory virus, which is relatively harmless for most people, this apocalyptic scenario has come upon the human race with lightening speed.

The culture shock resulting from such a transformation of our way of life is not new to Traditional Catholics who witnessed a similar evil sweep through the universal Church following Vatican II, trampling all that had been held sacred and secure for generations, thus paving the way for the present victory of Communist totalitarianism over the nations.

Archbishop Viganò  has more than once cited this work of iniquity as a coalition effort between operatives of the “deep Church” and operatives of the “deep State”, working together to bring about a New World secular Order over which Lucifer will usurp the Kingship of Christ.

That we are in fact living through the chastisement revealed by Our Lady in the Third Secret of Fatima is beyond question. Ours is a time largely of apostasy from God, even at the highest levels in the Church, resulting in victories for the anti-Christian forces beyond anything they, or we, could ever have imagined possible.

We know through faith of course that this time of trial will pass, as all such assaults of the devil on the Church and the world have passed. Our Lady will have the final victory and all will be restored in grace, though we know not how or when this will come about. What we do know is that matters are presently racing to a conclusion in this final battle between the serpent and she who will crush his head, so an end to it is not too far distant.

So much for the black and white of opposing forces in the present supernatural warfare, by which I mean the obvious evil and the obvious good as well as the happy outcome that those who are well disposed can see. But what about the grey areas, those danger zones which, like minefields, have to be traversed cautiously if we are to arrive safely at our destination when the war is won?

One such grey area has recently appeared before us and it threatens to wipe out a good many good souls who, in my opinion, have imprudently diverged from the safe path of the Church’s traditional and authentic moral teaching in favour of a more convenient, less arduous route only recently mapped out and offered non-authoritatively for alternative use.

I write of course about COVID-19 vaccines produced from or tested using the stem cell lines of aborted fetuses and the quite shocking position of the SSPX hierarchy in relation to their use.

If the faithful needed reminding that no particular institution in the Church is 100% safe at a time when the legitimate authorities themselves, the successors of St. Peter and the Apostles, are failing so manifestly in their duty to teach and to sanctify, it is in the SSPX position that such vaccines may be licitly taken in cases of necessity where moral alternatives are unavailable.

I first read (and re-read) this astounding and dangerously flawed guidance on the SSPX U.S. website some months back and I couldn’t believe my eyes. My Catholic conscience immediately alerted me to the falsehood before me.

I guess many other simple faithful were likewise seriously disturbed by this development, for the aforesaid website guidance was quickly taken down and replaced with a message announcing that an SSPX moral theologian was examining it, together with superiors, and would post an update soon.

Well it didn’t take long before the same guidance was back up on the website, only in a much longer text which read remarkably like sophistry.

The next I heard was that a certain Fr. Loop had been designated to present a conference on the subject to the faithful of Post Falls, Idaho – one of the largest Traditional Catholic enclaves in the U.S. I can only presume that many of the faithful remained troubled and Fr. Loop’s job was to reassure them. As far as I can tell from some comments I’ve read online, Fr. Loop failed in his task.

While this was ongoing I wrote to Fr. Fullerton, the U.S. District Superior, expressing my concern on the basis of the alternative (authentic) teaching of a number of tradition-leaning prelates whose counsel is that Catholics are not permitted to take vaccines tainted with the stem cell lines of aborted fetuses under any circumstances, given the very grave nature of the sin of abortion.

I wrote similarly to Fr. Loop, to Fr. Seligny, the SSPX moral theologian responsible for the U.S. website article and to Fr. Brucciani in the UK, who has sadly put out the same erroneous and dangerous advice. Not one of these priests granted me the courtesy of a response, which is extremely disturbing.

I did, however, receive a prompt and kind response from another SSPX superior who shall remain nameless for reasons of prudence.

Sadly, though, while evidently of upright intention, this superior is also on board with the “party line” (to use a crude term), convinced that the moral principle of “remote material co-operation” expressed in the works of St. Alphonsus may be applied in the case of grave necessity to abortion-tainted COVID vaccines.

Here is the proposition summarised in paraphrase: ‘The faithful are generally not permitted to receive abortion-tainted vaccines. However, in cases of grave necessity where moral alternatives are unavailable it is licit to receive such vaccines provided that objection is first made to the method of manufacture. This exception to the general rule, in cases of grave necessity only, amounts to “remote material co-operation”, a much lesser sin than formal co-operation.’

Juxtaposed to this proposition we have the joint letter of Cardinal Pujats, Archbishops Peta and Lenga and bishops Strickland and Schneider, reminding us of the authentic moral teaching of the Church. Here are a few excerpts of that letter which can be read in full here 

In the case of vaccines made from the cell lines of aborted human fetuses, we see a clear contradiction between the Catholic doctrine to categorically, and beyond the shadow of any doubt, reject abortion in all cases as a grave moral evil that cries out to heaven for vengeance (see Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2268, n. 2270), and the practice of regarding vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines as morally acceptable in exceptional cases of “urgent need” — on the grounds of remote, passive, material cooperation. To argue that such vaccines can be morally licit if there is no alternative is in itself contradictory and cannot be acceptable for Catholics…

…The theological principle of material cooperation is certainly valid and may be applied to a whole host of cases (e.g. in paying taxes, the use of products made from slave labor, and so on). However, this principle can hardly be applied to the case of vaccines made from fetal cell lines, because those who knowingly and voluntarily receive such vaccines enter into a kind of concatenation, albeit very remote, with the process of the abortion industry. The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it. One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the “fruits” (although steps removed through a series of chemical processes) of one of mankind’s greatest crimes…

…More than ever, we need the spirit of the confessors and martyrs who avoided the slightest suspicion of collaboration with the evil of their own age. The Word of God says: “Be simple as children of God without reproach in the midst of a depraved and perverse generation, in which you must shine like lights in the world” (Phil. 2, 15)…”

Bishop Athanasius Schneider reiterates the position thus In a separate LSN interview, the full transcript of which can be read, or video viewed, here 

“…I repeat, it is the most anti-pastoral and counterproductive, that in this time, exactly in this historical hour, [that] Catholics will justify their use of abortion-tainted vaccines with the theory of material remote cooperation. It is so illogical – we have to recognize this in this historical hour in which we are living…”

In yet another interview with LSN, Bishop Schneider warns:

“…some bishops, even good ones, are making a huge explanation to me in a sophistic manner, of the principle of moral cooperation only, without your will, without your consent. But this is for me as sophism which cannot be applied to this concrete case, because it is evident to simple common sense that when you know this – that this vaccine is from aborted babies – then you cannot apply this moral principle, or theory, to this concrete case. And therefore we have to be very careful not to be induced into error because of this sophistic argument, even when it comes from good, traditional priests. This is the danger, and we have to resist this…”   Read the full transcript here

Finally, in a May 8 “Appeal for the Church and the World“, signed by a number of prelates including Cardinals Gerhard Müller, Zen & Pujats, Archbishop Viganò , Bishop Schneider and other senior Churchmen as well as countless Catholic journalists, physicians, academics and associations, we find this declaration:

“…Let us also remember, as Pastors, that for Catholics it is morally unacceptable to develop or use vaccines derived from material from aborted fetuses…”  – click here to read the Appeal for the Church and the World.

Writing in reply to the aforementioned SSPX District Superior, whose identity is not important here, I upheld this authentic moral teaching of the traditional prelates and other Catholics in the following words:

“I share the view of Bishop Athanasius Schneider and the other traditional prelates in this instance, who insist that abortion is so uniquely and gravely sinful as to render the normal considerations of “necessity” and “remote material co-operation” moot. These are general moral principles that are weighed in matters pertaining to sins common to fallen human nature, not to sins that are against nature and which cry to heaven for vengeance. Hence, the “material co-operation” argument is misapplied in the case of abortion-tainted vaccines and is therefore fallacious…

…I would like to clarify that it was never my intention to contend that those who seek to benefit from these vaccines are guilty of formal co-operation in the sin of abortion itself, but rather that they are guilty of formal co-operation in the use of evil means, i.e., the immoral process of using aborted fetal cells in the production and/or testing of the vaccine. In other words, they are guilty of using an evil means in order to accomplish good–which is never allowed. I apologise if I did not make myself clear on this point in my previous communication.”

Summary…

For whatever reason, whether by simple error or for reasons of avoiding direct confrontation with this vaccine-pushing Pope and his various national hierarchies, the SSPX is seriously ill-advising the faithful for the first time in the 35-years I have been associated with it.

Therefore every Catholic with a sense of the faith, whose conscience automatically balks at the suggestion that we may, in circumstances of grave necessity, do evil that good may come from it, must disregard this SSPX advice along with that of other churchmen, be they Traditional or Modernist, Pope or priest, who propose the “remote material co-operation” fallacy in the case of abortion-tainted vaccines.

We are never at liberty to benefit from an evil means, not even when our lives depend on it. This is the authentic moral teaching of the Church and the faith of the martyrs, who could so easily have burned a mere grain of incense before the pagan deities to save their lives using similar argument in their minds, but who chose instead to die a cruel death rather than offend God.

Let us consider just one example of such ardent faith – the martyrdom of the early Christian St. Sophia and her three young daughters, aged 11, 10 & 9 years.

All four steadfastly refusing before the Roman emperor Hadrian to burn incense before the goddess Artemis, Hadrian proceeded to have the children horribly tortured one after the other in full view of their mother.

At length, when the children finally succumbed to the unspeakable sufferings inflicted upon them, St. Sophia was granted leave to take them for burial, the idea of the pagan emperor being that she should live with the torment in her heart.

But Our Lord had other plans. After three days of mourning her beloved children He took her from this world to enjoy eternal beatitude in heaven.

Compare this example of great faith with that of Catholics today who advise that it is licit under certain strict circumstances to use products made from or tested with the stem cells of brutally murdered little babies. Yes, it is wholly scandalous!  

 

Comment:

There will be people who attend SSPX churches who read this and become angry at the very idea that anyone should criticise the SSPX for just about anything. It’s an immature attitude, if not completely childish.

There will be comments flowing into me by email and newcomers to the blog who will languish in the moderation file, telling me to stop attending the SSPX church if I don’t like it etc. blah blah.  Martin will, needless to say, get it in the neck as well. 

So, please be assured; we fully appreciate the SSPX clergy providing us with Mass and the Sacraments.  Just as we appreciate that the Scottish Bishops are counted among the successors of the apostles.  Doesn’t mean we cannot comment on their statements or actions as we may comment on the statements and actions of other professionals. After all, priests are the most important of all professionals.

Other professionals are limited to catering for the well-being of people in this world alone, while priests are charged with the immensely more important work of preparing souls for eternity in Heaven.

So, folks, please don’t expect replies to any emails calling us names for expressing our concerns about this matter. A measured comment – absent any nasty personal remarks – submitted for publication on our blog, is a different matter. Feel free. 

Pope Francis Breaks With Tradition To Comply With Feminist Ideology…

Comment: 

Below, a selection of the comments on the YouTube platform…   

(1)      Scandalous.
(
2)     Sister? Humility? Why don’t you start by wearing your habit?
(
3)     When she says humility, she means Pride…Opposite world we live in now.

Add your comment below – do you, for example, see this as an attack on the priesthood? As a belittlement of  women’s central place in marriage and family life;  does it appear to approve the culture that all women must have a career, that  motherhood/family life are not of sufficient value? What then? 

IS talkRADIO “The Home Of Free Speech”? Just Ask Peter Hitchens… 

Comment:

The censored segment in the Mike Graham/Peter Hitchens interview is very significant.  Peter Hitchens isn’t saying anything that has not been said on this blog many times. So, what do the executives at talkRADIO know that the rest of us have not been told? Guesses welcome…  

Having lived in the Soviet Union – and he makes frequent references to the fact – Peter seems to be more aware than just about anyone else in the world of journalism/media that what is going on right now in the UK has led us into living life as populations do under Communist dictatorships. 

If only we could find an informed and committed Catholic journalist who would speak up in the same confident way,  with the ability to concisely explain the 1917 Fatima apparitions, including the later prophecy revealed by the Fatima seer, Sr Lucia; in an interview with American Historian Professor William Thomas Walsh in 1946,  Sr Lucia said that every country in the world would be overtaken by Communism, reinforcing the earlier warnings that Communism would spread unless the Pope & Bishops consecrate Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.  Russia, the first nation to publicly disown the very existence of God in its governance, has to be given back to God, and until that happens in the manner prescribed at Fatima, the world (and Church) will continue in turmoil. 

So, please… is there a Catholic journalist in the house? 

Vaccines: Catholics To Benefit From Murdered Babies On Vatican Say-So? 

Editor writes…

I received the following email last night from a reader in the USA…

Good evening,…

I wanted to share with you the most recent posting that my wife Vickie and I placed on our page concerning what we see as a shift in emphasis by many Catholics away from opposing the COVID-19 vaccine for moral reasons to relying on arguing pragmatically that the vaccine is dangerous (which it truly is). 

If you would like to use our posting, please feel free to do so.  Or you link to it, if you prefer …the priests here in Post Falls are apparently following the SSPX hierarch lead, unfortunately, even to the point of having held a “vaccine presentation” on 4 January.  We have our take on that in an earlier posting that you may find interestingOn Distractions and Staying Focused | Tradidi Quod et Accepi (wordpress.com)

In any event, please let me know what you think, and feel free to use what you wish from our blog. Ends

Coincidentally, I also received an email last night from a reader at home, here in Scotland, who is puzzled that her priest is promoting the vaccine – if the CDF has approved it then surely Catholics may take it?  

Given the continuing confusion surrounding the Catholic position on this (and on just about everything else, under the Francis pontificate), I think it’s time for another thread on the subject of the Covid vaccines.  Below, then, the text of the above linked article from the Tradidi Quod et Accepi blog…

From the Tradidi Quod et Accepi Blog…

On Distractions and Staying Focused

Over the last couple of weeks, the focus of the COVID-19 debate seems to have shifted — amongst Christians in general, and some Catholics in particular — from the moral liceity of abortion-tainted vaccines and pharmaceuticals to the dangers of the shots. It is a distraction that should give us concern; for the logical extension of the argument is that when or if we have a safe COVID-19 vaccine, there will no longer be any basis for objection. When I tried to re-focus a friend of many years on the real issue — the immorality of any vaccine associated with murdered babies — he argued we would never be able to convince our legislators of the evil of the vaccine on moral grounds, so we should shut down the vaccination program through the pragmatic approach of sounding the public health warning.

No doubt, many of those who agree with my pragmatic friend have viewed the interesting video making the rounds on “social media” of Dr. Simone Gold, of Frontline Doctors. In the video, Dr. Gold, who is also an attorney, gives a convincing presentation at what appears to be a Protestant church earlier in January, on the many dangers of what she correctly calls “experimental biological agents” being injected into millions of Americans. Some of you may remember that Dr. Gold and several of her colleagues had gone to Washington, D.C., several months ago and held a press conference there to promote the common sense approach of using hydroxychloroquine and zinc in the treatment of what Frank Walker of Canon 212 humorously calls “the Blessed and Eternal Virus.” You can view the hour-long video here:

Dr. Simone Gold: Experimental Biological Agents [Ed: YouTube removed Dr Gold’s video, but you can view it here ]

Dr. Gold’s sound arguments notwithstanding, most of us are adamant that the focus of the opposition to these vaccines should be on their lack of moral liceity.  We should be even more insistent that the current COVID-19 vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna are morally unacceptable after viewing the recent video of Lifesite’s John-Henry Westen interview of vaccine research expert Pamela Acker. Viewing this video will be an hour well spent:

Lifesite: Pamela Acker; Vaccine expert explains how aborted baby cells taint covid vaccines

Biologist Pamela Acker puts some big lies to rest in this interview, including the fable from “fact-checkers” (and unfortunately from some priests in the SSPX) that specific lines of what is termed “fetal cell lines” were perpetuated from two or three babies killed thirty of forty years ago. In fact, these stem cells/DNA (which Fr. Chad Ripperger correctly insists must be buried with a Christian burial) actually consist of stem cells/DNA from scores of murdered babies. The lie, for example, that HEK-293, which was used in both the development and testing of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, were not just from the one baby we were told was killed in 1973. In fact, in the interview, Pamela Acker specifically mentions HEK-293:

[T]he HEK stands for Human Embryonic Kidney, but 293 stands for . . . the 293rd experiment that this particular researcher did to develop a cell line. And that doesn’t mean that there were 293 abortions, but for 293 experiments you need far more than one abortion. And we’re talking probably 100s of abortions. And, this was done with the collaboration of some hospitals. And there was a group in Sweden that was involved in developing the WI-38 cell line, so a different cell line, but they routinely were aborting babies for the use in trying to develop fetal cell lines.

There is far too much info in the interview — some quite gruesome — to allow me to dwell on all the points that this courageous young biologist makes. I am anxiously awaiting her book, which is on back order. I will be reviewing Pamela Acker’s Vaccination: A Catholic Perspective, on this site in the near future, God willing. In the meantime, you can order the book from the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation at:

Kolbe Center; Vaccination: A Catholic Perspective, Pamela Acker

It comes down to this: the tragic fact is that even if a vaccine does not use mRNA, nor contain oncogenic elements, most are either tested with or contain stem cells of brutally murdered babies —  many, many more than we were being told by the Left and sadly, by the SSPX, which bought into the idea years ago that fetal cell line WI-38, for example, was from a single baby aborted forty years ago, as articulated on page 9 of the Dr. Timothy P. Collins, M.D., article in the Angelus “Vaccine” issue of February, 2006. In fact, a 2018 video of a court case in which the ghoulish vaccine researcher and developer, Dr. Stanley Plotkin, was a witness, is eye-opening and nauseating. Parts of the original footage (in which Dr. Plotkin, under oath, reluctantly admits that seventy-six murdered babies were used in the development of the stem cell line WI-38) have been included in another gut-wrenching Lifesite video here:

THE PROOF: Many aborted babies used in vaccine creation

As an aside, Dr. Collins makes this unfortunate statement in the second paragraph of his article in that issue: “I accept the usefulness of mass vaccinations in general.” The fact of the matter is, there is at the very least reasonable doubt that most of the vaccines routinely required for children today were ever really necessary. I will address this in a future posting; but for an excellent analysis of this, take some time to peruse the “Learn the Risk” website, particularly:

Learn the Risk: Did diseases decline because of vaccines? Not according to history

Unfortunately, too many traditional Catholics buy into the disinformation propagated in the infamous Angelus issue of February 2006 regarding the SSPX change of heart on Rubella vaccines.  The issue was prompted, of all things, by the pronouncement the year before by the Pontifical Academy for Life, that itself allowed Catholics the possibility of taking abortion-tainted vaccines like Rubella, if there were no alternative and if one makes his objection known.  The Angelus issue included the entire text of the PAL “decision”.  I have a copy of the February 2006 Angelus issue before me as I write. The article by Dr. Collins is obviously the centerpiece of the issue, and clearly breaks with the statement in 2000, by then-District Superior (and physician) Fr. Peter Scott. At that time, Fr. Scott was disseminating what he described as the teaching of Holy Mother Church regarding the moral theology principle of “cooperation in evil” with respect to abortion-tainted vaccines such as the Rubella shot. But in the February 2006 “Vaccine” issue of the Angelus, Fr. Scott, referred to as the “publisher emeritus,” changes his mind. On page 14 of that issue, he can hardly contain his enthusiasm for the June, 2005, statement from the Pontifical Academy for Life:

It is a surprising relief and unusual joy to find this quandary resolved authoritatively for Catholics. The document . . . is admirable and refreshing to see. (The PAL document) does allow the possibility of using such vaccines in the case of necessity for the health of one’s children when no other alternative exists, such being a very remote and material cooperation in the evil of abortion.

The February, 2006, issue is still available from Angelus Press. It is a sad and even heartbreaking realization — but an undeniable fact — that the SSPX unfortunately opened the door publicly to the possibility of taking abortion-tainted vaccines for “proportionate cause” with that Angelus issue – a break with what had previously been taught to the laity in the pews.  Most recently, the awful article that appeared in December, 2020, on the sspx.org website should give all traditional Catholics pause.  It is absolutely scandalous! All of a sudden, we agree with something out of “Modernist Rome,” as Archbishop Lefebvre so often called the cesspool on the banks of the Tiber. In fact, here is what Archbishop Viganò has to say about the Pontifical Academy for Life:

When we consider the new orientation of the Pontifical Academy for Life… we cannot expect any condemnation of those who use fetal tissue from voluntarily aborted children. Its present members hope for mass vaccination and the universal brotherhood of the New World Order, contradicting previous pronouncements of the same Pontifical Academy.

If you bring up objections to an SSPX priest, many will give you the three “talking points” reportedly being proffered as responses on at least three continents (though there are many priests who dissent from the official position):

  1. “You are too emotional!”
  2. “It is a very complex matter, and you are simply laymen;”
  3. “Don’t you trust us?”

Well, there is a plethora of responses I could give to each of those, but the bottom line is that sometimes, we lay people have to stand up, with a properly formed conscience and a sensus Catholicus, for what we know is the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church from time immemorial. We were told from the pulpit last week that we have to “discern spirits” and we were given elements of the three arguments above — obviously a thinly veiled slap on the wrist for those faithful at Immaculate Conception Church in Post Falls that have pushed back against what was disseminated in the unfortunate “vaccine talk” of 4 January. We must stand our ground and remind priests that they cannot assume we are stupid.  Furthermore, there are many, many Catholics – both traditional and Novus Ordo – who have discerned correctly that vaccines containing murdered baby stem cells (as described by Pamela Acker) or derived from such testing are morally wrong. Period!

We are on the right side of this issue, and we are in good company. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, and countless prelates and priests throughout the world stand with us! Here is Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, one of the few courageous American bishops, who wrote on 22 January, the anniversary date of the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton Supreme Court decisions:

All the political posturing on vaccines is truly disgusting. The fact remains that ANY vaccine available today involves using murdered children before they could even be born. I renew my pledge . . . I will not extend my life by USING murdered children. This is evil. WAKE UP! (Upper case in the original)

Dear readers, don’t be led astray by the distraction of the (very real) medical/scientific/health problems of the vaccines. And do not listen to those who try to rationalize that taking abortion-tainted vaccines is only “remote” cooperation in evil. It is sheer sophistry! These extractions and subsequent murders of babies for the sole purpose of medical “research” continue today. It is why Bishop Athanasius Schneider calls it “concatenation.” It is not only a linkage, it is an interdependence. Worse, by taking such morally unacceptable vaccines, we create a demand for more and more babies to die these horrible deaths, as the pharmaceutical companies perpetuate the lie that this barbarism (Bishop Schneider calls it “cannibalism”) is needed. So do not be distracted. Let’s stay focused on the real issue: the horrendous evil of abortion-tainted vaccines. May Almighty God grant us victory in this combat against the forces of darkness, which seem to have seduced so many of those who should be with us! [Emphasis added]

Note:  I have emailed the link to this discussion to the three SSPX priests at Post Falls – the Prior as well as the Principal and Vice-Principal of the school.

Some time later…  the administrator of the Tradidi Quod et Accepi Blog alerted me to the fact that they link to our original post on the topic of the SSPX support for the Covid vaccines in their original post on the topic, The SSPX Blinks – click here  

There is also a further post on the subject on their blog, enetitled The SSPX Dobles Down on the Vaccine here

Comments invited…   

Pope: I’m Not A Communist – Honest! 

Comment: 

The above video dates from 2015.  Questions were being raised even back then… and – in fact – from the day of Pope Francis’s election in 2013.  His “leftish” leaning was obvious from the get-go.  So, while he skirts, so to speak, the question about the papal red shoes, he cannot, quite so easily, conceal his modernism.  There are plenty of modernists reciting (without conscience) the Creed, some on a daily basis, so that particular reassurance is a bit like promising to take out a home insurance policy the day after you’ve been burgled. 

Anyway,  Pope Francis seems [albeit a tad weakly]  to deny the charge of “leftism”/Communism…

Are you convinced?    

USA: Speaker Nancy Pelosi – Archbishop Condemns Biden/Pelosi Abortion Beliefs… 

Comment: 

Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco is crystal clear in the above interview about the nature of abortion; it is not a divinely revealed Catholic teaching – which is why atheists, agnostics and people of non-Christian religions and philosophies across the world oppose it.  Abortion is an evil because it goes against the natural moral law, created by God with the Church guarding and promoting it. That is the Church’s role in the moral sphere; the Church doesn’t invent morals, but merely protects the moral law.  The Archbishop explains this fact simply and clearly – excellent. 

However, his response to the question about reception of Holy Communion was disappointing. The interviewer prepared the ground for a weak answer by emphasising the pastoral role of a priest to first speak with the person engaged in public sin (a given, of course), and seek to lead them away from that position.  However, once it is clear that a person – especially such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi who holds an important public office in the United States Government – is unwilling to end the scandal caused by her very public promotion of the evil of abortion, then Canon Law requires that they do not approach for Holy Communion:  Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.  Canon # 915.  

This clearly applies, also, to Joe Biden.  So, why are these prominent American lawmakers being allowed to cause this dreadful scandal,  while at the same time presenting themselves as “devout Catholics”?  And why is Archbishop Cordileone clearly reluctant to apply Canon 915 to Nancy Pelosi, who lives and moves and spreads her errors in his archdiocese?   

The Great Reset: The Plan For Global Totalitarianism – We Must Fight Back… 

Comment: 

Since nobody voted Klaus Schwab or any other members of the globalist elite into positions of authority over us, they have some nerve setting out, deliberately, and unashamedly, to change the way we live, to remove our freedoms which come from God, not from any politician or self-appointed wannabe world ruler. 

But what about Mark Moss’s take on how to deal with this very real threat – the plan to remove our right to privacy and to ownership whether of our homes or the clothes on our back… Is Mark suggesting anything we haven’t already identified on this blog? Can anyone add anything to his ideas about how to prepare for what the “great and the good” are planning for us in the next decade?  If so, shoot – I’m all agog! 

Archbishop-Elect Dermot Farrell of Dublin – The New Judas On The Block… 

From The Catholic Thing – Some Troubles in Dublin by Fr Gerald E. Murray

               Archbishop-Elect of Dublin,               Dermot Farrell

The Archbishop-Elect of Dublin, Dermot Farrell, gave an interview to the Irish Times soon after his appointment had been announced by the Holy See. (Click here for a transcript of the interview.)

The new archbishop declares himself in favour of women deacons and married priests. He does not find in the Scriptures an argument against the ordination of women to the priesthood. He calls the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality merely technical. He also says he has no problem with the private blessing of rings for divorced and remarrying couples and for homosexual couples (though he finds public blessings problematic because people often misconstrue them as actual marriages).

Amid so many other troubles, the Irish Church appears to be headed for more rocky days.

Farrell’s treatment of Church teaching and practice regarding homosexuality, for example, is dismissive: “It’s a technical description. People misconstrue that then because it is technical theological language.” He considers amending this technical language, because “I think Pope Francis has discussed that (removal). It came up at the last Synod.”

Really?  Farrell is referring to this teaching of the Catechism: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.” (CCC 2357)

In common parlance, calling language in a document “technical” can mean that it is unintelligible or is commonly misunderstood by the uninitiated, and is there to serve some arcane or legalistic purpose. Its removal is desirable but may be difficult to do if sticklers, purists, or legalists object. Better just to ignore it and treat it as a dead letter, as in “Technically speaking that is true, but. . .”

To describe the clear, unchanging, and unchangeable teaching of the Church on the inherent immorality of homosexual acts as technical language that could, and even should, be dispensed with is plainly a rejection of that teaching.

The rejection of homosexual activity, and the homosexual lifestyle, by faithful Catholics, however,  is not a misconstruing of “technical” language found in the Catechism. Those who want the Church to embrace and bless the homosexual lifestyle object to the language of the Catechism not because it is misconstrued by clueless people who think it means that no one should engage in homosexual acts because, being intrinsically disordered, they are immoral. Rather, they object because the language is easily and correctly understood to mean just that. The problem for them is not the allegedly confusing words used, but rather the clear meaning of those words.

Archbishop Farrell, in response to a question about blessing rings for divorced and remarried couples and for same-sex couples, says:

The difficulty with blessings is that they are very often misconstrued as marriage. Priests have given these blessings in the past. I remember one colleague of mine. I had said to him – he used to have this ceremony of the blessing of rings – I said to him I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings if you’re doing that here in the house but if you go out into the public domain, in a church, and bless rings as you see it. . .they turned up with 200 people and they saw it as a marriage. Sometimes people use that phraseology. . .you’re into confusion there. It can be misconstrued as “yes, the priest married us.” Blessings are always going to be misconstrued and that’s where the difficulty arises because once you start blessing things like that people are going to construe that as a marriage. We can’t have that sort of situation in the Church because it creates all sorts of problems in terms of our own teaching and these teachings of the church have been constant.

Leaving aside the question of blessing the rings of divorced and remarried couples, what exactly are we to understand is the meaning of blessing the wedding rings of same-sex couples, whether in private or in public? Is it a misconstrual to consider that the priest who does such a blessing approves of the relationship that the homosexual couple has entered into (which is a counterfeit, pseudo-marriage), and asks God’s favor and approval upon that relationship as symbolized by the rings?

The Modern Catholic Dictionary defines a blessing thus: “In liturgical language a blessing is a ritual ceremony by which an authorized cleric in major orders sanctifies persons or things to divine service, or invokes divine favor on what he blesses.” The dictionary’s entry on rings states: “Conferring the ring is an integral part of the marriage ceremony to signify the mutual love of husband and wife, and wearing the ring symbolizes their pledge of marital fidelity.”

The main problem with blessing wedding rings of a same-sex couple is not that people will become confused and think that the priest was actually  marrying them. No, the main problem is that a priest who does such an unholy act is giving the impression that God will favour what He has condemned. Same-sex “marriages” are not marriages in any way, shape, or form. It’s a gravely sinful relationship in which two men or two women pledge to sodomize each other. No blessing should ever be invoked by a priest upon this unnatural relationship nor upon the pirated symbols of the holy estate of marriage.

Archbishop Farrell says: “I don’t have a difficulty with blessing rings.” If that’s true, what he does have is a more fundamental difficulty: God has warned shepherds who mislead their flocks into paths of sin and error that they will be held accountable. Let us pray that the new Archbishop of Dublin will forswear his comments and reaffirm the Church’s actual teaching and practice.  Click here to read at source

Comment:

There’s really nothing left for me to say – except pray for poor Ireland.  As if it’s not due a break.  From my trip to Dublin at the time of the abortion referendum I have one memory which will be forever fixed in my mind and it is this:  handing out our leaflets and engaging with the few members of the public who didn’t tell us to blankety blank off, I met one woman who expressed herself heart-broken about the state of the Church in Ireland, that it had come to this – a referendum on murdering the unborn. She told me that she had daughters who were going to vote in favour of legalising abortion, and her tears fell. My heart went out to her. Catholics have been very badly served by the clergy in Ireland.  And after the abortion and then the same-sex “marriage” votes, the Pope is still not satisfied; the people of Ireland need yet another bad bishop – and one who is not afraid to publicly display his fake Catholicism.

As I intimated at the beginning of this short comment – there’s really nothing left for me to say.  Over to you… 

USA: Brave Priest Warns Biden Win Is Nothing For Catholics To Celebrate…

Comment:

Priests with this quality of unapologetically speaking out clearly and fearlessly are gold-dust.  Let’s pray for more and more to preach boldly like Fr Gigliotti. 

The problem is that seminary lecturers have pumped socialist ideas into the heads of young students for the priesthood over a period of many years now, to the point where they think like secular people on just about every level.  It is, therefore, going to take a special grace to enable most priests so see the truth and embrace the courage to preach it. Otherwise, Catholics for generations to come will be malformed in the Faith, and unable to tell the difference between good and evil – which is what we are witnessing in these times. 

During the 20th century, notably in the “swinging sixties”, we were led into a mindset where everything was relative, right or wrong depending on one’s own point of view, and that has led, inevitably, to a society where nihilism rules: we don’t know right from wrong, good from evil. 

As we are finding ourselves subject to Communist tyrannical rule, we need priests to wake up to the reality of the danger to the world of a Biden administration. They don’t call the President of the USA “leader of the free world” for nothing. We have been depending on President Trump to keep the forces of Communism at arm’s length. Now, with Biden supporting the objectives of Communist China, we are, humanly speaking, lost.  Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!   

We are grateful for access to the American TV news channel, Newsmax TV, where one of my favourite presenters is Chris Salcedo.  He is a consummate professional, and not afraid to express his Catholic Faith, as we see in the above video.  God bless him!