There is a reason that they made sure that people believe that the elderly are the most at risk from this ‘Covid’ fraud. With the next ‘wave’ or the next ‘virus’ they’ll say “we did it wrong last time, so this time we need to round-up and isolate the 65+ crowd and let the rest get on with their lives”. People will think this is a great idea (they get to keep working, etc) , not knowing that the elderly people (anyone 65+) will be sent to their deaths. Then the B.S. story will be that the 2nd wave was just too strong to defeat and it ravaged 90% of the elderly.
Do you know why they want to do this? Look into what Catherine Austin Fitts wrote many years ago. She worked in the Reagan/Bush-1 White-House and she said many years ago that all of the money had been stolen from all of the pension funds and everyone’s retirement fund was gone. She said that Wall Street’s plan was to kill-off the elderly so that they would never have to make good on all of the pensions that were stolen, and they won’t have to provide care for the elderly.
Now in 2020, the USA (and many other countries) are using the ‘corona crisis’ to try to establish a new monetary system and eventually introduce a new currency; well, let me advise you, the new currency won’t last 10 years if they have to immediately print-up enough money to reimburse all of the elderly for their stolen pensions and provide medical care until their natural deaths.
So when you hear about how it is necessary for your elderly parents, siblings, etc to be taken to containment centers for their own protection, remember that their fate is already sealed if they are taken. They will be put to death all in the name of securing the viability of the new monetary system.
Peoples’ pensions do die with them except in certain scenarios where the spouse is allowed to continue to receive part of it. Remember, the spouse is usually virtually the same age and would have fallen under their planned ‘euthanasia’ scheme too. And it’s the pensions, not the money/assets of the deceased which are of importance here. The pensions of, and the cost of care for, the elderly are the unfunded liabilities which would bring down the new monetary system very quickly.
You immediately doom any monetary system when you make it commence its lifespan by the mass-printing of new money to fill in the gaps left by the now-defunct previous system; it puts the new system right back under the same duress which finally made the old system implode.
“…and no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark, the number, or the name of the beast.”
by Laramie Hirsch
As I said way back in March, people are going to come to obsess about the Coronavirus. You know, that Chinese Flu that was first cooked up in a North Carolina lab, exported up into Canada, and then later smuggled into a Wuhan bio lab? By now, most people understand the idea of a pandemic. However, the biggest reactionaries to this—more than the average person—are corporations. The Catholic Church is no exception, as it’s capitulated to this great fear faster than anyone else. And, of course, let’s now forget the Left as a whole, which idolizes the transformation of society through oppressive systemic controls. Covid-19 is a wondrous opportunity for them.
Since these institutions are in control of just about everything, you can now only buy, sell, or trade with the mark of this beast. And that mark of submission? It is the very mask you have to wear in public. It is doubly punitive to those people who are forced to wear the mask for entire shifts at their job, only to have to continue to wear it when they go to the store to buy what they need. That is not to say that we are wearing the literal “mark” for the literal “Beast of Revelations,” although it is clear to most faithful Catholics that we are trapped beneath an oppressive system that is anti-Christ. There can be no doubt about that. Yet, we can say certainly that we are wearing a type of mark for a type of beast.
And so, we find ourselves in an excellent training ground for what is to come. While these times may be a dress rehearsal for enemies who excitedly wait for the final last gasp of Christian resistance, these days can also serve as a training ground for the rest of us. Yet, what do we see when we go out in public? We see almost complete capitulation and submission. To refuse to wear the mask is to become an outlier and a pariah. If you dare to go into a store and not wear the mask, you will be like Charlton Heston discovering that “Soylent Green is people,” or Officer Logan 5, who just discovers that people can live past their middle age years without having to be euthanized. You become a member of an out-group.
For now, the punishment is social ostracization and the denial of commerce. In some places, though, online video shows people are physically restrained and arrested for not wearing the mark.
Pay Homage To The Gods
As we proceed into the 21st-century, it becomes increasingly clear that Americans idolize their technology. They give themselves completely to creature comforts, vice, convenience, and all the baubles offered by extremely powerful corporations. This arrangement has put extremely wealthy and influential organizations and corporations in a kind of divinity status. On paper, they are simply businesses that are doing well economically. But in practice, these organizations are like the ancient Caesars who thought themselves demigods.
Everyone must pay homage to these Caesars. All must submit to the imperial cult. The masses must bring forth divine honors to their leader, corporate America. For, the super organisms we call corporations have actually morphed and coagulated into one, single, mono-organism. For big business, solve et coagula has been accomplished. And this multi-headed hydra, this oligarchy, has attained a status similar to Caesar’s divi filius, which translates to “divine son”, or son of a god. And who can deny this idea that these companies who sell you soft drinks and digital movies ultimately pay homage to the Dark Prince, himself—the Evil One who fancies himself as the god of the universe? Are Christians not told year after year to boycott most of the commercialized products peddled to us on a minute-by-minute basis? Don’t these companies take part in a kind of secular religion that honors homosexuality, abortion, feminism, globalism, and other modernist ideals?
Modern American commerce is a “cult of the emperor”, and it is not hard to figure out the nature of this religion—particularly when we consider all of the recent rumors swirling around these past few years of satanic, pedophile sacrifices taking place among the very powerful and monied powers of our society. Corporate America has become your imperial deity, much like the Caesars of old.
Christians vs The Imperial Deity
It would do well for us to remember the times of the ancient Romans, when the first Christians began to spread the message of Christ throughout Rome. Many have heard stories about early Christianity, but many also have forgotten the literature:
The Christians were not so fortunate. Yet their position was logical and was clearly and consistently maintained. They honored the emperor as ruler but declined to recognize him as a god. This distinction the Roman authorities refused to admit. They insisted that the worship of the national gods and the emperor in particular was the duty of every citizen and that to refuse was an act of disloyalty. Hence the mere profession of Christianity was regarded as a crime against the state. One who was accused of that crime might clear himself by the simplest act or word implying reverence for the gods or acceptance of the divinity of the emperor. Several notable instances are recorded in which this test of loyalty was applied to the Christians. Pliny in his well-known letter to Trajan reports that as governor of Bithynia he required them to worship the gods and to offer wine and incense before the emperor’s statue. Polycarp, the aged bishop of Smyrna, when commanded by the proconsul as the condition of his release, to swear by the Genius of the emperor, replied, “You do not know what I am. I am a Christian.”
The Biblical World, Volume 40, edited by William Rainey Harper, Ernest DeWitt Burton, and Shailer Mathews
The Christians would not be tolerated. They were ordered to worship caesar as a god and add a pinch of incense to the fire in his honor. It was just a simple little thing. They could have done this, and moved on to take advantage of the fruits of the Roman Empire. After all, it was not as if these early Christians were like Roman pagan families who participated in private worship, burning incense before the images of the emperor and leaving offerings of food and drink to him and the other household gods. And it was not as if these early Christians were rushing to take part in elaborate and costly public worship rituals of their ruling “demigod.”
Yet, quite a few of those early Christians gave in. They avoided sacrificing themselves and completely betrayed their loyalty to Christ, as we can see in the exchange between Pliny and Trajan:
Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.
Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ–none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do–these I thought should be discharged.
Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.
They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.
From a Letter by Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan, in approx. 112 AD
The wishes of corporate moguls are strapped across the mouth of everyone’s face. Many people now realize that the medical mask fiasco has nothing to do with a virus. For most people, those deemed “asymptomatic“, they do not even notice that this bio weapon is in their system. It is a benign phenomenon, observable only by chemical testing. Less than a half a percent of the people with this virus die. It has been shown that hospitals and governments are inflating the death count in order to score higher numbers. Yet, Americans continue to wear the mask, fearful of one another’s cooties.
The Romans did not distinguish their religion from their politics. Religion was a function of the state. And so, too, is it with us. We live under a “sanitary dictatorship,” as Bishop Athanasius Schneider once called it. And the dark sacrament for the New Wisdom is to cover your face, become a part of the herd, and cancel out your individuality.
Defy Caesar’s Claim To Divinity
Corporations, governments, and the corrupted hierarchy of the Catholic Church—these principalities and powers, all of them, have turned the facemask issue into a religio-political situation. They have abolished normal society and transformed everyone and everything into a desolate abomination of its former self. The 21st Century has become a Bizzaro Land nightmare for any time travelers unfortunate enough to land here. And to make sure that you comply with Caesar’s edict, there is a legion of Karens, hall monitors, tattletales, and neo-Stasi acolytes just waiting to turn you in, slap you around, shame you in public, and write you citations for non-compliance.
This must not stand. This must be protested. This must be resisted.
If the people of our society do not resist this new cult in all-but-name-only, then we have witnessed “the camel nose under the tent.” Once that camel raises his head and starts walking around in the tent, your world will be mangled and destroyed forever. Therefore, civil disobedience and defiance must be put into practice. If you must shop at a store, and a “health officer” tries to make you conform, make a scene. Do not let the moment pass without doing anything. The time to be bold is now. The time to be the salt of the Earth has arrived. Put away your cowardice, and do not be afraid to let everyone else know that two plus two is four.
Walking around without a facemask in a masked-up world can be unnerving. It makes one feel like the only human being on the Planet of the Apes. You silently ask yourself, “What the hell is wrong with these people?” Meanwhile, the muzzled masses continue looking down at their phones. Do not be scared. I am with you in this. A lot of us are. You are not the only one. Your refusal to submit to pressure shows that you have a powerful will to do what is sane. It demonstrates that while most are weak, you are not. This simple act of not giving in will become a more commonly discussed topic in the future. Be at the head of the wave. Ahead of the curve. The tip of the spear.
When you go out in public, and you see everyone in a facemask, know that everyone there is not afraid of germs. Realize that everyone hiding behind a face diaper is not terrified of a virus. They are wearing it so that they do not look out of place. They are wearing them so that they will not become a pariah. Bring your own face with you, and remind the cowards that they were human beings once. Your spiritual ancestors, the first Christians, did this very thing. Your opportunity has arrived today.
You owe nothing to corporate America. Caesar is not a god.
+ + +
di Don Alessandro Minutella
Le dimissioni di Benedetto XVI, annunciate l’11 febbraio 2013, per quanto invalide, hanno inaugurato una nuova, irreversibile forma storica di papato. Una forma che Dio ha previsto per questi nostri tempi di apostasia. Il papa perde, a partire da Benedetto XVI, ogni veste di autorità mondana, ritorna ad essere l’inerme Pietro che, dinanzi all’impero romano, proclama Cristo come Salvatore. Ogni orpello rinascimentale, ogni apparato scenico e coreografico è del tutto abbandonato. Pietro torna tra i fedeli, torna in mezzo al gregge. Con le vesti dell’umiltà e senza più alcuna rilevanza politica e sociale, ma con una carica spirituale e profetica (in una parola evangelica) che, proprio per questo, diventa ancora più forte. Benedetto XVI è il papa di una Chiesa cattolica non più potente e rilevante, ma sofferente e perseguitata. Da quando ha lasciato il trono, è iniziata una nuova, sorprendente stagione papale.
Noi sappiamo che il cuore del munus petrino, con ogni evidenza teologica, è quello di Mt 16,18-19: “tu sei Pietro e su questa pietra edificherò la mia chiesa e le porte degli inferi non prevarranno contro di essa. A te darò le chiavi del regno dei cieli, e tutto ciò che legherai sulla terra sarà legato nei cieli, e tutto ciò che scioglierai sulla terra sarà sciolto nei cieli”. A questo passo si aggiunge anche Lc 22,31: “conferma i tuoi fratelli”. Infine c’è anche Gv 21,17: “pasci le mie pecorelle”.
In questo modo, il munus petrino si identifica come volontà stessa di Gesù Cristo e quanto la riflessione teologica e la codificazione canonica vi hanno potuto aggiungere, sono solo esplicitazioni del comando stesso di Gesù. Il papa è colui che, in quanto vescovo di Roma, presiede all’unità nella carità e conferma i fratelli nella fede. Così, in sintesi, afferma la riflessione teologica, ma ciò solo in intima coerenza e come deduzione del nucleo stesso del munus. Gesù ha costituito Pietro come capo del collegio apostolico (Mt 16,18), garante della fede (Lc 22,31) e pastore del gregge (Gv 21,17).
Nel corso dei secoli, come si diceva, questo nucleo centrale e insostituibile del munus petrino, che è quello di guidare la Chiesa e confermare i fratelli, si è arricchito o appesantito (secondo i punti di vista), di forme e usi non attinenti al nucleo centrale stesso, e che pertanto, anche quando sono stati persi, non hanno tuttavia toccato la sua natura intrinseca. Giulio II a cavallo con la corazza oggi sarebbe del tutto riprovevole. Quando con Pio IX, il papato perse il potere temporale, lì per lì sembrò una disgrazia, in realtà era piuttosto un dono della Provvidenza. Successivamente, soprattutto nella stagione pre e postbellica, il papa ha assunto il ruolo di capo di stato vaticano, tale per cui egli ha dovuto intrattenere rapporti diplomatici, sovente faticosi e tumultuosi, con i capi politici del pianeta, dedicando agli affari internazionali non poco tempo e fatica. Proprio questo rimaneva l’ultimo avamposto, diciamo così, inframondano del ruolo petrino, niente affatto inerente alla sostanza del munus fondato da Gesù. Certo, il fatto che il papa fosse anche capo di stato vaticano, gli garantiva una certa strategica possibilità di influenzare le politiche globali. E tuttavia, il rischio è stato quello che, dietro a questa preoccupazione politica, si perdesse di vista il nucleo centrale del munus petrino.
Da quando Benedetto XVI ha lasciato il trono, portando con sé il munus, la storia del papato ha avuto un capovolgimento copernicano. Niente più alcuna rilevanza politica e sociale, resta soltanto il papa come pastore universale dei fedeli, garante della fede e pastore universale del gregge. Non pochi osservatori, soprattutto di area tradizionalista, ma non solo, temono questa nuova (eppure originaria) forma evangelica del munus petrino, perché legati, come ai tempi di Pio IX, al potere temporale. Eppure è un segno dei tempi. Pietro torna ad essere soltanto il pastore e il garante della fede, senza più alcuna zavorra politica sociale.
Benedetto XVI ha avviato una forma di papato che il successore svilupperà in pieno. Non poche profezie si incrociano su questo papa che verrà dopo Ratzinger. In Ecuador la Madonna del Buon Successo nel XVII secolo ha descritto le caratteristiche del grande prelato, che sembrano riguardare proprio i nostri tempi di apostasia della fede e di eresia dilagante. Viene fuori l’identikit di un successore impegnato unicamente nel governare pastoralmente il gregge, confermando con forza i fratelli nella fede.
La notte del 2 febbraio 1634, mentre la madre Mariana, la veggente, pregava nel coro della cappella, la lampada del Tabernacolo si spense, lasciando il sacro luogo al buio. La Madre stava per andare a riaccenderla, ma si sentì come bloccata da una forza sconosciuta e restò quindi in attesa. Improvvisamente apparve la Madonna, vincendo le tenebre col suo splendore e illuminando la cappella come se fosse stato pieno giorno. La Santa Vergine le disse: “lo spegnersi della lampada che arde davanti all’Amore prigioniero ha molti significati (…) si diffonderanno varie eresie, e, sotto il loro potere, la luce preziosa della Fede si spegnerà nelle anime per opera della quasi totale corruzione dei costumi. In quel tempo vi saranno grandi calamità fisiche e morali, pubbliche e private. Le poche anime rimaste fedeli alla grazia soffriranno un martirio tanto crudele e indicibile quanto prolungato; molte di esse scenderanno nella tomba per la violenza delle loro sofferenze e verranno considerate come martiri sacrificatisi per la Chiesa”. È in questo contesto anticristico che la Santa Vergine parla del grande prelato: “quel prelato che dovrà restaurare lo spirito dei suoi sacerdoti. Questo mio amatissimo figlio verrà dotato di una capacità rara, di umiltà di cuore, di docilità alle divine ispirazioni, di fortezza per difendere i diritti della Chiesa e di un animo tenero e compassionevole, affinché, come un altro Cristo, provveda al grande e al piccolo, senza disprezzare i più infelici. (…) Nella sua mano verrà posta la bilancia del Santuario, affinché tutto venga fatto con peso e misura e affinché Dio venga glorificato. Alla rapida venuta di questo padre e prelato, però, sarà di ostacolo quella timidezza di tutte le anime consacrate a Dio, che è anche causa del dominio di Satana su queste terre”.
Colpisce soprattutto che la Madonna definisca il grande prelato “un altro Cristo”. Quasi come contrapposizione all’anticristo!
L’identikit del grande prelato corrisponde incredibilmente a quello della beata Caterina Emmerick, che profetizza l’avvento, dopo il tempo dei due papi, di un uomo di Chiesa, che proviene da sotto Roma, intorno ai cinquant’anni, di nobile stirpe, che vestirà di rosso.
Egli starà in mezzo ai fedeli, non abiterà più palazzi sontuosi, e non avrà più cortei pontifici. Dimesso e umile, sarà forte e coraggioso, e animerà i fedeli durante l’ultima persecuzione.
Anche il monaco Malachia, stimato da san Bernardo, dice che il successore di colui che chiama Gloria olivae, identificato con Benedetto XVI, sarà l’ultimo papa. Scrive Malachia: “in persecutione extrema Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae sedebit”, cioè “regnerà durante l’ultima persecuzione della Santa Romana Chiesa”. Il suo nome simbolico è Petrus Romanus.
Questa ripresa del tutto pastorale e spirituale del munus petrino, oggi, è temuta dai circoli tradizionalisti e dai nuclei salottieri che, infatti, bollano come misticismo fuorviante e settario. Ma, ripeto, la sostanza del munus l’ha stabilita Gesù Cristo ed essa prevede queste tre linee essenziali: capo del collegio apostolico, custode della fede e pastore del gregge. Non vi è chi sappia replicare seriamente a queste mie considerazioni. Semplicemente perché è quanto Gesù stesso ha stabilito. Tutto il resto, per quanto utile e talora indispensabile, è però accessorio. Un papa che torni del tutto pastore e padre, non più capo politico e diplomatico, privato ora di ogni rilevanza sociale, è niente affatto un disastro, anzi. Oggi quanti temono che con Benedetto XVI sia iniziata questa forma di papato spoglio ed evangelico, somigliano ai papalini del periodo risorgimentale, del tutto ansiosi che il papa perdesse il potere temporale.
Anche in questo Benedetto XVI ha del tutto squalificato il suo antagonista Bergoglio. Quest’ultimo, recitando un ruolo già preordinato, si sforza goffamente di apparire un papa povero, un papa della gente comune, un papa dimesso. In realtà, il potere che egli esercita nel mondo, in relazione agli stati e alle politiche europeiste, immigrazioniste, globaliste ed ecologiste, con i vari arcobaleni, lo accreditano come uno dei più potenti del pianeta.
Benedetto XVI, invece, è il papa del raccoglimento, della preghiera, del servizio al disegno di Dio, il papa della croce e del martirio, il papa di Fatima, il papa sofferente, che ha spogliato, lui sì, il munus di ogni inutile sovrapposizione mondana.
Ci vuole sguardo profetico e coraggioso. Ci vuole il fuoco del vangelo.
Mentre i progressisti bergogliani irridono queste profezie incrociate, i tradizionalisti UNA CUM, le temono, boicottandole. Entrambe le direzioni, non più cattoliche, ma ideologiche, e con molti interessi occulti e mondani, si sono impantanati nello sforzo titanico di riconoscere Bergoglio come papa, garante della fede, pastore secondo il cuore di Dio, valido successore di Pietro.
A partire dal momento in cui egli ha piazzato Pachamama a Roma, nel cuore della fede cattolica, per tutti questi non resta che la vergogna.
Ma il piano di Dio va ugualmente avanti. Le strategie nascoste o l’irrisione degli pseudo cattolici modernisti non impediranno che si realizzi il disegno di Dio.
Persino l’elezione del successore di Benedetto XVI scalzerà via istituzioni fradice e corrotte, come quelle del collegio cardinalizio (vera lobby massonica) e del conclave (assise segreta e corrotta l’ultima del 2013). Sarà finalmente e nuovamente il popolo santo di Dio, come nel primo millennio della Chiesa, a eleggere e scegliere il pastore voluto dal cielo. Verosimilmente quello chiamato a guidare il gregge nel tempo dell’anticristo.
di Max Tex
E’ inevitabile ed umano schierarsi.
Mi riferisco all’articolo di Roberto De Mattei apparso il 1 luglio 2020 su Corrispondenza Romana (Le incognite della fine di un pontificato). Vediamo di chiarire definitivamente da che parte stia l’autore.
Riassumiamo qui brevemente le tesi principali dell’articolo.
L’esordio è sullo stile catastrofista tipico del giornalismo di certa nobile ”intellighenzia” (che sembra schierarsi ma di fatto non lo fa mai):
“Le dimissioni di Benedetto XVI saranno ricordate come uno degli eventi più catastrofici del nostro secolo …. ma soprattutto a una situazione di caos crescente nella Chiesa.”
Poi continua accennando addirittura al “fumo di Satana”. Dice infatti:
“il “fumo di Satana” rischia di avvolgere il Corpo Mistico di Cristo come forse mai è accaduto nella storia.”
Che significherebbero queste affermazioni e quali implicazioni potrebbero mai avere? Buio totale. Sembra si butti il sasso giusto per far rumore o per far saltare il sasso. Ma non vi è nessuna successiva analisi, spiegazione, chiarimento o discussione in merito e meno che mai una disamina delle possibili implicazioni razionali! Niente, nada, zero!
AFFERMAZIONI “PROBLEMATICHE” SUL PONTIFICATO BERGOGLIANO
A questo punto l’estensore dell’articolo si lancia in una serie di affermazioni “problematiche”. Vediamo di che si tratta. Afferma infatti (distinguendo per chiarezza i vari punti):
-“Il pontificato bergogliano è arrivato alla fine ….dal punto di vista del suo impatto rivoluzionario.”
-”Il Sinodo post-amazzonico è fallito”
-“Esortazione dello scorso 2 febbraio e’ stata la pietra tombale di tante speranze.
La prima affermazione è chiaramente indimostrata e gratuita. Possiamo soltanto immaginare infatti, ma non conoscere in dettaglio, le prossime iniziative di Bergoglio in campo ecclesiale, teologico e politico. Soprattutto, non siamo affatto in grado di escludere che le sue prossime mosse possano avere una portata se possibile ancora più radicalmente distruttiva e catastrofica per la Chiesa Cattolica.
Riguardo al Sinodo Amazzonico in quale senso sarebbe, di grazia, fallito? Non nel senso di costituire i viri probati alcuni dei quali, infatti, sono già stati nominati. E nemmeno nel senso del diaconato delle donne, visto che lo stesso argomento è ora al centro del sinodo della Conferenza Episcopale tedesca (REFUTAZIONE RAZIONALE DEI MODERNISTI: IL NUOVO CASO DI GEORG BÄTZING).
Infine per quanto concerne l’esortazione Querida Amazonia, è del tutto evidente che questa non abbia affatto fallito gli obbiettivi (naturalmente quelli concepiti dalla mente astuta di Bergoglio). Tutt’altro! Infatti è una vera e propria esaltazione dell’ambientalismo ateo e idolatra stile pachamama inaugurato da Bergoglio (e di cui abbiamo presumibilmente visto finora solo l’inizio)! Infatti dopo aver illustrato i “sogni” dell’ambientalismo mondialista si conclude addirittura in modo trionfante con una preghiera idolatra alla stessa pachamama! E’ dunque una pura ingenuità pensare che abbia fallito! Si tratta nientemento di un pezzo del programma del Nuovo Ordine Mondiale (NWO).
LA QUESTIONE DEL MUNUS E DEL MINISTERIUM
L’unico punto parzialmente condivisibile è in riferimento a mons. Georg Gänswein che viene citato successivamente.
Precisamente riguarda la menzione del
“discorso di mons. Georg Gänswein del 20 maggio 2016 alla Pontificia Università Gregoriana, in cui egli affermava [del tutto correttamente] che papa Benedetto non aveva abbandonato il suo ufficio”, avendo [“argomento princeps”] rinunciato al ministerium e non al munus, e “rendendo [quindi il papato] un ministero quasi-condiviso” («als einen quasi gemeinsamen Dienst»).
La conclusione, che però significativamente manca nell’articolo di De Mattei, è che si conferma quanto à dovrebbe essere ben noto a tutte le persone raziocinanti (e cristiane). Ovvero che Papa Benedetto XVI non abbia affatto rinunciato al munus petrinus e pertanto – stando alle parole di Gesu Cristo in persona riportate nel vangelo di Matteo 16: 18-19: E io ti dico: Tu sei Pietro e su questa pietra edificherò la mia chiesa e le porte degli inferi non prevarranno contro di essa. A te darò le chiavi del regno dei cieli, e tutto ciò che legherai sulla terra sarà legato nei cieli, e tutto ciò che scioglierai sulla terra sarà sciolto nei cieli. — è ancora lui il Papa!
ATTACCO AI “CONSERVATORI CATTOLICI” E EXCUSATIO NON PETITA
Il “clou” dell’articolo però (non inaspettato peraltro) che chiarisce da che parte stia l’autore dell’articolo, giunge con l’accusa diretta ad una non meglio precisata
“parte del mondo conservatore” [cattolico] che “avrebbe rivolto lo sguardo a Benedetto, considerandolo il “vero Papa”, contrapposto al “falso profeta”.
Secondo lo stesso articolista, infatti, l’errore commesso da
“questi conservatori [sarebbe che ] non hanno voluto seguire la strada aperta dalla Correctio filialis consegnata a papa Francesco l’11 agosto 2016.”
Come si sa lettera, come le successive, rimasta peraltro totalmente inascoltata.
Peraltro è interessante la “excusatio non petita” che viene qui introdotta esplicitamente dal De Mattei a beneficio di Bergoglio. Si tratta nientepopodimeno di quanto segue. Frase che cito testualmente:
“La vera ragione [è che] la radice delle deviazioni bergogliane risale ai pontificati di Benedetto XVI e di Giovanni Paolo II e, prima ancora, al Concilio Vaticano II. “
L’INNO A PAPA FRANCESCO
Per chiarire però definitivamente da che parte sia l’articolista (De Mattei) basta dare un’occhiata alla conclusione. Che e’ tutto un inno e un poema a Bergoglio. Infatti afferma che:
“Papa Francesco non ha mai teorizzato l ‘ermeneutica della “discontinuità”, ma ha voluto realizzare il Vaticano II nella prassi”. Questo compito JM Bergoglio l’avrebbe svolto in modo “vincente…nella realtà concreta dei fatti teologici, liturgici, canonici e morali, e non in uno sterile dibattito ermeneutico”.
Non si tratterebbe quindi di una colpa, bensì di un merito quasi eroico da parte di Jorge Mario Bergoglio!
di Andrea Cionci
Con papa Benedetto a Ratisbona, la prima iniziativa di Bergoglio è stata quella di inserire nelle Litanie Lauretane (che si recitano alla fine del Rosario) tre nuove invocazioni alla Madonna: “Mater misericordiae” (Madre della Misericordia), “Mater spei” (Madre della Speranza”, e “Solacium migrantium” (aiuto, soccorso, sollievo dei migranti).
Giusto ieri, avevamo citato – con preoccupazione – il fatto che l’idea fissa per i migranti di Bergoglio venga spesso accostata dai suoi oppositori all’agenda del Nuovo Ordine Mondiale, un presunto complotto satanico-massonico che avrebbe tra i suoi principali obiettivi, appunto, l’implementazione massima dell’immigrazione: leggi qui.
Non abbiamo fatto in tempo a scriverlo, che è uscita l’ultima novità. E non ci aiuta granché nel difendere Francesco, anche perché la cronaca riserva proprio in questi giorni fatti tristissimi con protagonisti gli stranieri.
Continua di leggere al blog personale di Andrea Cionci, su Libero.
+ + +
by Elizabeth D. Wickham, PhD
Executive Director, LifeTree
Lest there be any doubt. Covid-19 is as much political as it is medical. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that a lot of what was once purely medical has become political, thanks in part to the euthanasia movement. Medicine is being fundamentally transformed to make sure that euthanasia has a primary role in the standard of care for the seriously ill.
Please take time to follow this essay to its conclusion and you should end with a realization that indeed palliative medicine was just the beginning of a major transformation in medicine. We will end where we begin, with what is happening at the National Academy of Medicine, formerly the National Institute of Medicine.
The National Academy of Medicine is led by Chinese American-born and pandemic expert Dr. Victor Dzau. The NAM is working on a new era of healthcare delivery known as Precision Medicine. The description uses words such as data, algorithms and precision molecular tools, high value, improving outcomes and decreasing cost. A key element is merging an individual’s health data into an entire community’s data so that they can use artificial intelligence and algorithms to specify a patient’s medical treatment. (See the NAM Sept, 2016 Discussion Paper “Realizing the Full Potential of Precision Medicine in Health and Health Care: A Vital Direction for Health and Health Care” https://nam.edu/realizing-the-full-potential-of-precision-medicine-in-health-and-health-care-a-vital-direction-for-health-and-health-care/).
To understand Dr. Dzau’s role in transforming healthcare is a major project. You might want to listen to Amazing Polly’s video titled “More Public Health Mafia Connections” which is the first video at https://www.amazingpolly.net/videos.html. She says he is everywhere!
How to establish a pervasive role for palliative medicine now that medicine has been shaken by a serious pandemic is an important task for these people of the Third Path. A couple of videos might help you understand what evolved rather quickly during these last two months. Both videos feature Dr. Diane Meier of the Center to Advance Palliative Care. The first one is a public webinar of Meier and others including the important Dr. Sean Morrison of the National Palliative Care Research Center (NPCRC) and the second is a Diane Meier interview by Alexandra Drane of the Coalition to Transform Advance Care. They help us understand how the palliative model is changing during this pandemic.
The first video takes place at the Center to Advance Palliative Care on March 31, 2020. CAPC is located adjacent to Mt. Sinai Hospital in Manhattan which was in the epicenter of the pandemic. Attached is a transcription of that video and hyperlink.
(From Video #1): “…A couple things we thought might be helpful but in fact turned out not to be helpful. The first was, our initial thought was that we could train front line providers in core communication skills and core pain and symptom management skills that would relieve pressure on palliative care teams; that turned out not to be true; that what was seen and what we have seen happening is that Emergency Departments, ICU’s and even Hospital Services are so overwhelmed with patients that people only really have time to manage clinical symptoms, intubate where necessary and provide critical care…”
Hence, Diane Meier and her CAPC members decided to move at least one palliative care professional into every ED and ICU of the Mt. Sinai Healthcare System.
Meier and Morrison talk about getting sufficient numbers of their palliative people into the critical sections of hospitals during the surge. One in ER and one in ICU won’t be enough. Remember, up until this point in time, palliative-trained specialists in hospitals appeared as part of formal palliative care teams (physician, nurse, chaplain, social worker). Now, with the pandemic riding rough shod on all actions taken within the hospital, the process of deciding on goals of care had to be compressed.
They decided to make a palliative expert who was experienced at “having those conversations” available 24/7 by phone on the front line. A hotline available straight through to someone trained in the palliative philosophy could solve the numbers problem.
Also on video #1 they talk about making available to frontline clinicians palliative care protocols for symptom management (pain, shortness of breath, etc.).
” …but what our system has done to try to support non-Palliative Care clinicians that are taking care of sick patients, is put pocket cards with scripts, literally, how do you talk to a family about this and very easy to read and interpret symptom management… almost recipes (14:49). What’s the starting dose of opioids for shortness of breath? What do you have to do if that doesn’t work? When do you increase the dose? So, having those types of resources ready before you need them, would be really helpful. We’ve been scrambling to get them done 3 – 5 days after we needed them and… so… most of those resources are available for… virtually all of them are available for free, for download, on the CAPC website.”
The second video was released last week on CAPC’s blogsite — getpalliativcare.org. You can listen to Sunday in May, 2020 interview of Diane Meier by Alexandra Drane of the Coalition to Transform Advance Care (a policy making organization for the Third Path Euthanasia Movement). For those who want to study this video more carefully, the transcript of text is attached. Here is the video hyperlink.
Diane Meier describes the change in palliative care due to the pandemic, especially how the hotline to a palliative care professional now has a bridge-like role. She relates a specific case and how it progresses from her to the clinician and then from her to the family.
Remember, the hotline from the hospital to a cell phone somewhere is manned by a palliative care specialist (e.g. Diane Meier) who is trained in “having family conversations.”
Here’s how it works. The patient arrives and someone at the hospital calls the cell phone number. The palliative care specialist at the other end of the phone number gets in touch with the clinician (physician) in charge of the patient. The palliative care specialist asks the clinician to describe the patient’s condition — “how does the patient look”, etc. Then the palliative care specialist calls the patient’s family and waits for everyone to get on line. The palliative care specialist relates to the family the conversation he/she just had with the clinician. Then they probably discuss whether the patient has an advance directive. If there are no directives the palliative person asks the family what the patient would want in the way of medical treatment. Then the palliative person asks the family if the patient’s choice would change should the patient become worse…. Yada, yada, yada.
The stark reality is that the patient whose life is at stake is not a party to either conversation! Because of the new CMS guidelines for isolating patients with Coronavirus-19 symptoms from their families a new protocol for palliative care is developing. Now there are cell phone numbers to palliative experts that take the Coronavirus-19 patient out of the picture. The palliative professional becomes a bridge upstream to the doctor and downstream to the patient’s family. They are the bridge Soros built to medical care for patients with Coronavirus-19.
A comment on the death rates due to this virus. I would venture to say that the death rate due to coronavirus-19 has been inflated by multiple decisions to give “comfort care only” guided by a Palliative Care Specialist. These people have a different goal than most of us!!
Monumental Changes in process
Now let me take you back to the beginning of our journey to understand the monumental changes in healthcare and how they are changing with the pandemic. At the beginning I mentioned Dr. Victor Dzau of the National Academy for Medicine and the NAM initiative to develop what they call “Precision Medicine.” Isn’t it a coincidence that the SUPPORT Study was conducted at 5 medical centers including the one at Duke starting in the late 1980s and ending in the early 1990s. See the part 2 of lifetree’s timeline at https://www.lifetree.org/timeline/part2.htm.
Along the way Dr. Victor Dzau was CEO and President of Duke University Health System and on the Board of Health Governors of the World Economic Forum, chairing its Global Agenda Council on Personalized and Precision Medicine. He is on the Expert Board of the Imperial College Health Partners, UK which provided some of the outrageous models for mitigating pandemics.
Fast forward to November, 2019. Now we have that same Dr. Victor Dzau co-hosting a symposium event at Duke called “Vital Direction for Health and HealthCare: The North Carolina Experience” with Dr. Mandy Cohen who in the 2010s was in charge of rolling out the Affordable Care Act! She is now head the NC Dept of Health and Human Services.
I believe “Precision Medicine” is about using Artificial Intelligence and developing algorithmic tools to determine what medical treatments will be given and paid for. (or not.) “Precision Medicine” is one step beyond Palliative Care which has always been sold as a cost effective medical tool.
Republished with permission of its author
+ + +
by Don Elia
A Catholic Priest
All totalitarian regimes, in order to assert their unconditional power, impose on the people a conglomeration of rules that are so absurd as to be ridiculous, so useless and unreasonable; the important thing is that people submit without argument, which can cause very serious trouble.
In the present case, however, there is little to laugh about, given the damage caused by the rules of containment to all areas of individual and collective life: collapse of industrial production, growing poverty, suffocating social control, climate of fear and suspicion, deteriorating relationships, emotional isolation, psychosomatic illnesses… In such conditions the individual ends up feeling helpless, vulnerable, unprotected and is therefore pushed to take refuge in the apparent security offered by an authority which, in reality, no longer operates for its actual good, but only to its own advantage, to maintain power for the benefit, in the final analysis, of those who manoeuvre it from behind the scenes.
Of course, there will still be those who will still label these speeches as a form of conspiracy, but history teaches us that a regime cannot impose itself or maintain itself without the support of a financial oligarchy that feeds it to achieve its own hidden purposes.
Independent information, in such a context, is an indispensable weapon of defense. It is now clear that we are victims of an enormous media manipulation that has exaggerated the problem with the effect of creating panic, but continues to disseminate incorrect data on the health situation, so as to make an objective evaluation practically impossible. The systematic effort to discredit opinions contrary to the official version appears suspicious to say the least, also taking into account the fact that the members of the unquestionable Scientific and Technical Committee certainly do not shine by competence, given that their names occupy very low positions in the H-Index, the ranking that orders the authors according to the impact of their contributions on the scientific literature. It is not at all difficult to explain their appointment with purely political reasons, as soon as one examines their ideological orientations, which have very little to do with science. Those who do not profess the “creed” of the dominant thought (gender, globalism, immigrationism, reproductive health, dignity of dying, etc.) do not have the slightest chance in this system.
In the legitimate and rightful attempt to acquire truthful knowledge of the current situation, however, one cannot avoid vigilance and discernment, in order to avoid falling into the traps set for those who, mistrusting official lies, seek lies elsewhere. Sites are beginning to appear in which nothing but regime propaganda passed off as alternative information is spread, but there is also no shortage of those who spread colossal hoaxes to discredit those who instead work seriously; the documented statements of competent journalists, then, are often deliberately deformed in a tendentious way to undermine their reliability. However, there are facts that are difficult to challenge, if you consider the amount of news about it: from projects of planetary scope called 5G, Bluebeam, ID 2020, to the declared desire to vaccinate the world population (with findings that would modify the human genome, cause cancer and make them all traceable) by a virus created in a molecular biology laboratory and regularly patented. Each of these subjects would deserve its own research.
This investigation, however necessary it may be, in turn hides another trap, this time of a spiritual nature. The danger, here, is to let oneself be sucked into the analysis of earthly reality and lose sight of the supernatural horizon. The masses of information, the laughter of hypotheses, the skein of conflicting opinions are a labyrinth from which one risks never coming out again, forgetting the presence of God in history, who governs everything with His providence and guides events towards the triumph of His kingdom. He extends His invincible Hand to protect those who believe in Him with sincere faith, await with unshakeable hope the fulfillment of His promises and assiduously practice active charity. He sends the Angels to guide them, protect them and watch over them; He wants the intercession of the Saints and welcomes their prayers; He chooses fervent souls who offer themselves to Him to draw graces to others… in a few words, He deploys all His resources to help them with the help of the creatures closest to Him. It is upon this extraordinary reality that we must fix our minds and hearts not to succumb, but also not to do wrong to the Creator.
The correct cooperation between nature and grace requires man to play his part in identifying and avoiding dangers, but he is constantly asking for both the inner light to recognize them with certainty and face them in the right way, and the supernatural force to successfully oppose threats. Although the cardinal virtues cannot be treated in depth here, it seems clear from the available data that the first decision to be taken will be the rejection of the announced vaccine and swabs, which are far from safe and easily exploitable means to make huge profits from the health crisis. It is neither lawful nor legal to force citizens to undergo a particular medical treatment; moreover, it makes no sense to do so with those who have not shown any symptoms. Serological testing for plasma donation by cured people cannot be carried out except on a voluntary basis, either.
Beyond what can be humanly understood, however, the primary resource to resist remains prayer, which is indispensable both to develop the supernatural virtues and to increase the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The more one prays, the more sensitive one becomes to the Divine Voice that resounds in the depths of a pure conscience: Audiam quid loquatur in me Dominus Deus (I will listen to what the Lord God says in me; Ps 84:9). The humble, persevering plea to the Almighty also communicates an invincible strength over human powers: only he who kneels before God knows how to stand before men.
In particular, in the present moment, one must oppose the iniquitous provisions concerning communion. We absolutely cannot give in on what we have most precious of all: not expedit! If we let the Lord be treated in this way, how far will His enemies dare to go? In the Eucharist the Redeemer still surrenders himself to men, but not to be outraged and crucified again, but to feed them for eternal life. I therefore beseech my brother priests not to apply the norms and not to allow themselves to be intimidated by human decrees rather than by divine judgment: we will have to account for much more than others!
Do we really or not believe in the protection that the Lord grants His faithful ministers? And is it not an honor to suffer for Him, if any? “They left the Sanhedrin with joy, for they were considered worthy to be outraged for the name of Jesus” (Acts 5:41). How will we be able, on the day of death, to look up with confidence to the heavenly Judge, if we have feared the earthly judges more? How can we still say: “The Body of Christ”, in delivering it as a despicable object? How can we continue to preach His word pretending to be taken seriously? No, my brethren, we cannot give up on what is so serious. Why not all together, every day, invoke Mary Help of Christians and Saint Michael the Archangel to defend and guard the Church? They will answer us immediately: try to believe. Array of Angels and Saints fight with us against the demonic hordes and their human allies. Learn to celebrate in the traditional rite and you will become warriors of the King of Kings, of that Crucified One who, risen, triumphed by ascending to heaven, having received all power in heaven and on earth.
And you, dear faithful, do not be discouraged, but insist that Holy Communion be given to you in a proper manner: it is your sacred right, which no one in the world can trample on! Prove yourselves worthy of Him who for you has suffered death on the Cross and give Him all the honour you can. If you really cannot obtain what you ask, offer a novena to the Holy Spirit, through the intercession of Mary Help of Christians, so that He may make you find a priest who will communicate to you properly. There are many more of them than appear, but they are scattered a bit everywhere and, out of necessity, discreet, since the first ones to fear are often their superiors. Do not judge priests who do not consent to you, but pray for them, so that they may convert or take courage, even with the supernatural prudence necessary not to be put out of play. Divine Wisdom suggests unthinkable solutions when the sheep invoke it in faith for their Pastors. As a last resort, communion can be given outside of Mass, but the best answer remains, in this case, a necessary resistance, which will be all the more effective the more extensive and generalized.
O Mary, powerful Virgin, great and illustrious defense of the Church! Thou, wonderful help of Christians; Thou, terrible as an army in battle; Thou, who alone destroyed all the heresies in the world; Thou, in anguish, in struggle, in need, defending us from the enemy and, at the hour of death, take us to Heaven! (by St. John Bosco)
Sancte Michaël Archangele, defende nos in proelio; contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium. Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur: tuque, Princeps militiae caelestis, Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos, qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo, divina virtute in infernum detrude (Leone XIII).
In Deo faciemus virtutem; et ipse ad nihilum deducet tribulantes nos (In Dio faremo cose potenti; egli stesso ridurrà a nulla coloro che ci affliggono; Sal 59, 14).
La visione dell’Ambasciatrice per la libertà è macchiata solamente di qualche parole scoraggiandoci d’avere fiducia nel potere del Cielo per aiutara un popolo cristiano perseguitato dai marxisti.
A COMMENTARY ON THE PROTOCOL
SIGNED BY THE ITALIAN BISHOPS’ CONFERENCE WITH THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT
ON THE RE-OPENING OF CHURCHES FOR MAY 18, 2020
Proud to kick-back!
by Don Elia
The Following is an English translation of the Italian Original.
Μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροζυγοῦντες ἀπίστοις
(Do not yoke yourself with unbelievers; 2 Cor 6:14).
The recent Memorandum of Understanding for the resumption of celebrations with the people, with its sacrilegious and unacceptable provisions, seems to have come out of the extravagant fantasy of a dystopian novelist. Even sticking to considerations of a purely legal nature, one immediately realizes its absolute invalidity, given that it was signed by subjects without any legitimacy: on the one hand the representatives of the Italian government, which has no competence in matters of religious worship; on the other the president of the Episcopal Conference, which has no jurisdiction over bishops. In addition to this it should be added that the executive, once again, omitted to consult Parliament; the ecclesiastical interlocutor, for his part, is not authorized to deal with the State. Even if, at the civil level, the procedure provided for by the Constitution had been respected (for example, with a decree-law ratified by the President of the Republic), the Concordat, which in all this paradoxical affair no one has ever mentioned, almost as if it no longer existed, would still have been violated. Such circumstances make the Protocol a completely illegal act, devoid of any legal value and any compelling force, which is why it must be unconditionally rejected.
Regrettably, the common impression is that a good slice of the clergy is ready to observe the rules that will start on 18 May. In these circumstances it becomes ever clearer why so many “vocations” with homophile tendencies have been promoted in recent decades, not only by inadvertence, but probably also by choice: an aberrant will, motivated either by complicity (a striking case, that of the United States) or by an erroneous conception of mercy, which makes it possible to convert into titles of merit the failings of clement and “understanding” bishops and formators. That is why young people who should never have been admitted to holy orders not only became priests, but also made brilliant careers. Since they are fragile, insecure, influential, ready for acquiescence, often blackmailable because of their scandalous conduct, they adapt easily to any request, thus being perfectly functional to the clerical-world system that uses them for its own perverse purposes with the cover of a substantial judicial immunity, at civil and ecclesiastical level.
If one is surprised by the inertia or ineptitude of many current bishops, one must bear in mind their basic formation, in many cases lacking. Their average age allows us to place them in the seventies and eighties of the last century, precisely when the academic level of theological studies plummeted to an all-time low and the approach to the faith became decidedly Protestant. These factors determined, in a substantial part of the clergy, a showy inability not only to think catholically, but also to reason correctly. This intellectual poverty and the consequent mental deformities, today, mean that the absurd situation in which we find ourselves appears completely legitimate to many and that even the mere hypothesis of passive resistance to the abuses perpetrated by the State takes on the appearance of an unthinkable monstrosity, as if it were the most serious sin of all, an unforgivable attack on the common good and public health. The supernatural level disappeared from the gaze, which flattened on earth; the theological faith died out, replaced by the surrogate of the new Masonic humanism.
The post-conciliar ideal of openness to the world has led the contemporary clergy to a complete assimilation to the world, as if the Church were nothing more than any form of social aggregation or a homogeneous welfare body to civil society and, consequently, submissive like all others to the State, considered supreme (and sole) instance of legislation, judgement and government. There are now all the typical elements of a State Church, led by hierarchs assimilated to civil servants and civil servants; the seeds sown sixty years ago have sprouted and produced their harmful fruits. In this context it was inevitable that total surrender to the dictates of political correctness and the transformation of ecclesiastical institutions into propaganda agencies of the regime would be achieved. This evolution involves a progressive cession of their own areas of autonomy in teaching, worship and jurisdiction, with the production of a body of constitutional priests and bishops, who comply with human provisions, rather than divine ones, because they are in fact maintained by the State: the 8 per Mille (0.8% voluntary income tax to benefit the Church) and the sustenance of the clergy thus proved to be a well-designed trap to obtain absolute subjection from unbelieving and secularized clerics.
The answer we must give is twofold. In general, the Italian Church must be deprived of all economic support until there is a jolt of reaction with which it rejects State interference and claims its independence. In order to fulfill the precept of providing support for the needs of the Church, one can directly help the faithful priests and deserving institutions, a more than legitimate and historically normal way. In particular, then, we are obliged to ignore government decrees and to receive (or give) the Eucharist only in the manner permitted by the sacred discipline established by Tradition, not in a sacrilegious manner. If the priest refuses it, protest energetically, because he is committing a serious abuse; if, however, he does not hear reasons, send a canonical complaint to Cardinal Sarah and, in the meantime, seek a trusted priest who will communicate to you outside of Mass. To give in to the abuse, at this moment, would be to let a gap open that could widen more and more. The situation is already all too compromised because of the C.E.I. officials conniving with the Freemasons; even in the French Revolution it was the clergy who cooperated with the Jacobin maneuvers aimed at annihilating the Church. These prelates either do not know history or want to repeat it; keep in mind, however, that with those of the martyrs, sooner or later, their heads will also fall: the revolution devours its children.
To consent to the illegitimate claims of the government would be like swearing on the Civil Constitution of the Clergy of 1790, which was condemned by Pope Pius VI, albeit late, and rejected by almost all the bishops and two thirds of French priests. Sure, thousands ended up in prison, on the scaffold or in old galleys sunk with cannon fire… but their souls went straight to Heaven, while the fate of the unrepentant collaborators is Hell. I don’t know about you, but I have no doubt about it. The time has come to take a public stand by showing ourselves to be disobedient in public, as did those who wanted to remain faithful to Christ and refused to submit to the yoke of the wicked, to which we are not allowed to submit. It is not a matter of disobeying, but of obeying God by rejecting the iniquitous and unlawful orders of men, which bind us in nothing. The Church, having survived all persecution, will also overcome it, even though the enemy has infiltrated it to place its pawns in its command posts. It is up to us to resist for as long as the Lord will, until He intervenes to punish the child-rapists and reward the believers.
CREDITS: The Featured Image above is a Pexels.com stock photo and does not represent anyone associated with Don Elia.
by Antonio Socci
Originally published by the Libero Quotidiano: May 4, 2020
Authorized English translation by Giuseppe Pellegrino
Reprinted with permission of the translator
Like the Biblical prophets and the great popes of history, Benedict XVI is both hated by the powers of this world and loved by simple Catholic people. And every time that he comes out of his hermitage to speak the truth, he illuminates the darkness of the present situation of humanity and the Church. He is the object of furious attacks – which have been going on ever since his election as pope – that have now come to the point of the distortion of his words and his moral lynching.
This week great controversy has broken out over the anticipation of the release of Ratzinger’s biography written by Peter Seewald, Benedict XVI. Ein Leben, which is being published in German and will appear in Italian [and English] this fall.
In the book, the Pope Emeritus responds to various questions and explains, for example, his dramatic and enigmatic statement in his homily given at the inauguration of his pontificate [on April 24, 2005]: “Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves.”
It is a phrase that has taken on enormous significance since February 11, 2013, when Benedict XVI announced his stepping back. What was he alluding to with those words? Is this where we should try to find the reason for his “resignation”? Was he forced to step aside in such a way that it makes that resignation invalid?
And so Pope Benedict, responding to these questions, invites us to reflect on “how much fear can strike a pope.” Many observers – especially after his stepping back – thought that it had to do with the unfortunate episode of Vatileaks, “but the true threat to the Church and thus to the Petrine ministry,” the Pontiff explains, “does not consist in these things but rather in the world dictatorship of apparently humanistic ideologies that oppose anyone who does not conform to the established social consensus. Even one hundred years ago, everyone would have thought it absurd to speak of homosexual marriage. Today those who oppose it are excommunicated from society. Things are similar for abortion and the production of human beings in laboratories. Modern society is formulating an antichristic faith, which you cannot oppose without being punished with excommunication from that society. And thus it is more than natural to have fear of this spiritual power of the Antichrist, and it really takes the prayer of an entire diocese, indeed of the universal Church, to oppose and resist it.”
In these few lines, Ratzinger – as always – manages to condense extraordinary reflections that merit our deep consideration and reflection.
Of course, the Repubblica immediately tried to distort Benedict’s words, reducing his comments to a rant against “abortion” and “gay marriage,” thereby giving the nod to the entire media establishment and unleashing an onslaught on social media against the pope, who has once again been covered in mud. Ironically, by doing this the champions of one-way tolerance immediately proved the truth of Benedict XVI’s words: anyone who does not fall in line with the mainstream is declared to be anathema.
But the Ratzingerian reflection is much more profound. In perfect continuity with the Magisterium of Paul VI and John Paul II, Benedict XVI has spoken once again to denounce the dominant modern ideology that not only is anti-Christian but is also dramatically opposed to human life.
Like Montini and Wojtyla, Ratzinger captures the apocalyptic connotation of the present moment, in particular that of the “dictatorship of relativism” which opposed him during his pontificate and that today holds power, since it is also widespread within the Church.
Benedict XVI is not afraid to speak of the Antichrist, causing many critics who believe they are enlightened and progressive to rise up against him, but ironically by doing so they simply display their ignorance of the many books and philosophical and theological debate on this topic. There are actually many non-Catholic thinkers who have addressed the theme of the Antichrist in recent years. The Marxist philosopher Mario Tronti said in 2013 after the “resignation” that the pontificate of Joseph Ratzinger was “an heroic attempt hold back the post-modern form of the Antichrist.”
Similarly dramatic reflections have been made by Massimo Cacciari (I refer to them in my new book Il Dio Mercato, la Chiesa e l’Anticristo [The God of the Market, the Church, and the Antichrist]). Among other things, Cacciari declares: “We could speculate that Ratzinger resigned because he was no longer able to hold back the antichristic powers within the Church herself.” But now “the Church finds herself facing, for the first time, the true essence of the Antichrist.” Cacciari also published a more philosophical reflection in 2013, Il Potere che frena [The Power that Restrains]. The essay by Giorgio Agamben is also valuable: Il mistero del male (Benedetto XVI e la fine dei tempi) [The Mystery of Evil: Benedict XVI and The End Times].
In light of Benedict XVI’s words – “And thus it is more than natural to have fear of this spiritual power of the Antichrist” – we could well be led to believe that he had to flee “before the wolves,” which would render his “resignation” invalid.
But what sort of “resignation” did he make? As he explained on February 27, 2013, he remains pope “forever” and he preserves his papal name and title.
In my book, The Secret of Benedict XVI (Angelico Press, 2019), I demonstrated that, due to the enormity of the Enemy who was facing him – and since he felt his strength diminishing – Benedict XVI humbly made “a step to the side” in order to make space for someone whom he could assist by his prayer and counsel in the task of being the Kathécon (“the one who restrains” cf. 2 Thess 2:6-7). Thus was opened a new and unprecedented era of “collegiality” in the papacy – unprecedented because it is apocalyptic.
But then the cardinals chose the man who had opposed Ratzinger in 2005, who is now the pope beloved by the worldly powers. And so today Benedict XVI finds himself called mysteriously to a task that only God knows. He remains on a mission from God.
by Marco Tosatti
An English translation of the original Italian, entitled, Ordine di Malta, il Futuro: Nulla è escluso. Anche clamoroso.
Dear friends and enemies of Stilum Curiae we offer you a reflection on the situation that has arisen after the death of the Grand Master of the Order of Malta. With the death of Fra’ Giacomo Dalla Torre del Tempio di Sanguinetto, which occurred shortly after midnight on April 29, a not exactly reassuring scenario opens up for the Order of Malta. The disappearance of a leader – who, in this case, is both ‘religious’ and ‘secular’ – is always in itself something which quakes the system, but even more so – we believe – it will be for the Order of St. John who has already been experiencing a deep institutional crisis for at least four years.
Suffice it to say that already in the afternoon hours preceding the official announcement of the departure, there were discordant news (which sources tell us were sent by an imprudent letter signed by Prince Erich von Lobkowicz, powerful president of the German Association of the Knights of Malta) on the Grand Master’s state of health, who was declared dead prematurely, with a very quick update of the Wikipedia page, later corrected, following an official communiqué of the Order and the letter “signed” by the Grand Commander (the Order of Malta’s second office and responsible for religious life), the 80-year-old Portuguese, Fra’ Ruy Gonçalo do Valle Peixoto de Villas Boas.
Such a thing would never have happened in other times, not least because it is presumed that news concerning the health of the head of a religious Order who is also – a unicum in the current legal panorama – Head of State must necessarily be filtered through the entourage of close and, hopefully, trusted collaborators.
The late Grand Master had personally announced – in an unusual letter dated 24 February last – that he had health problems linked to a diagnosed throat cancer that would have taken him away from many institutional commitments because of the treatment he would have had to undergo; in that same letter, in a truly anomalous way, Dalla Torre had, among other things, written “The important decisions will remain in my hands”, as if to reassure that no one would take advantage of them. But why write it, we wonder?
All these creaks give the impression of a very frail institution in itself, which seems to forget its almost a thousand years of history of battles and victories for the defense of Christianity.
A very weak government, that of Brother Giacomo Dalla Torre, chosen for his well known bonhomie, for his integrity but also for the undisputed closeness of his noble family to the Vatican world: his grandfather Giuseppe was director of L’Osservatore Romano, while his brother, Giuseppe himself, was for decades (until a few months ago) the influential president of the Vatican Tribunal.
A government that has also shown its flaws and its pockets of incapacity since the lieutenancy that Dalla Torre assumed as a “buffer” to the wound inflicted on the sovereignty of the Order with the expulsion of the former Grand Master Fra’ Matthew Festing by the now untrusted Teutonic-Vatican maneuver devised by the first hunted and then reinstated Grand Chancellor Albrecht Freiherr von Boeselager, who also asked for the head of Card. Raymond Leo Burke, freezing him the office (which still formally exists today) of “Cardinalis Patronus”.
A singular coincidence of dates: Dalla Torre was elected Lieutenant precisely on April 29, 2017 – under the supervision of Msgr. Angelo Becciu (now Cardinal, Prefect of the Congregation of Saints), at the time the most powerful Substitute to the Vatican Secretariat of State and very faithful to Pope Bergoglio, appointed “Special Delegate” of the Pontiff to the Order – and the Lord calls him to himself on the same day, three years later.
Both as Lieutenant and even more so as Grand Master, on May 2, 2018 behind the clear placet of the Transtevere, alongside the undisputed moral and religious qualities of great value, Dalla Torre was never able to show the institutional attitude that contingencies demanded, very often allowing a form of heterodox management of the Order over which he had been placed in charge. It allowed all three Italian Grand Priories (which would be the territorial government bodies which run clinics, welfare facilities, charitable works, and to which the Order of Malta’s Italian Relief Corps [CISOM] is linked) to be managed by “procurators” and not by religious (a form of indirect commissioning). It allowed the Pope’s Special Delegate to block the novitiate for the new “professed” (i.e. those knights who take a vow of poverty, chastity and obedience and become the “first class” of the Order), thus immobilising the Order’s religious life, now reduced to a mere decorative aspect, which, if not reactivated, will be destined to be quickly wiped out. Don’t forget, among others, also the big slip-up of the prohibition in the ceremonies of the Order of the Mass in ancient rite (see here our comment at the time): an act certainly imprudent, probably the result of internal institutional blackmail, but which was also an inappropriate form of plagiarism against a presumed “apostolic” will, almost as if to demonstrate that in the Order of Malta – already badly seen in itself because it would embody (at least in principle) a certain elitist and excessively aristocratic approach to Catholicism – no voice is given to the “traditionalist” seditious people; it was also an indirect attack on the sensibility of the predecessor Festing, notoriously a lover of Tridentine spirituality; in short, it was a testimony to an alignment which probably was not necessary. It seems at least suggestive to consider that Dalla Torre died at the first light of day when the Church, in the calendar of the traditional mass, commemorates the Universal Patronage of Saint Joseph, who is also the patron saint of good death.
Beyond this – which in any case constitutes a “political” consideration of the style of government but is certainly not a moral judgement (which would appear ungenerous, even before being reckless) on the person – now with the death of Dalla Torre there are very problematic scenarios for the life of the Order.
First of all, it should be noted that the death of a Head of State, which occurs in a circumstance such as the one we are experiencing due to the planetary blockade of the pandemic, certainly suffers ceremonial repercussions, starting with the uncertainty about the funeral: Certainly, the Order of Malta is a subject of international law that enjoys, therefore, sovereignty, independence and also extraterritoriality, for which the grotesque measures containing the Italian legislation on the subject would certainly not be applicable; however, objectively, we do not believe that a rite proportionate to the dignity of a “Most Eminent Highness” is conceivable. Probably there will only be a ceremony restricted to members of the Sovereign Council and professed knights; perhaps one could hope for the consolidated practice for which, in the trigesimo of the disappearance, state funerals will be officiated in the presence of heads of state and the diplomatic corps. We shall see; of course it is a pity that the head of a religious order, who is in any case a very pious and devout man, cannot have a worthy moment of extreme greeting with the honours he is due.
But beyond the pitiless protocol problems – although in this world form is substance – the institutional scenario that opens with his death is much more significant.
The Grand Magistry’s communiqué, issued last night around 1.00 a.m., informed that “According to Article 17 of the Constitution of the Sovereign Order of Malta, the Grand Commander … has assumed the functions of Interim Lieutenant and will remain head of the Sovereign Order of Malta until the election of the new Grand Master”.
Now the problem is really big. Already from his Lieutenancy and then, in his Magisterium, Dalla Torre was to conduct and conclude the Order’s constitutional reform. Commissions were organised (in which, however, the professed religious knights were largely marginalised), there were exchanges of documents (all internal acts, nothing public, of course), and then everything fell into oblivion, in a form of acquiescence to the status quo: very imprudent for those who cannot count fifty years of government experience among them.
Everything is now in the hands of the Grand Commander.
Yes, of course, formally that is the case, but it is clear that an 80-year-old Portuguese gentleman (and not exactly sprightly at what one sees and knows), who has remained confined to Portugal, will not be able to manage a complex situation like this on his own, and will therefore need help. There is no doubt that the obscure Grand Chancellor Boeselager will pull the strings… but the first obstacle is the incomplete reform, which is therefore also useless. Because, on closer inspection, the Order is in the same stalemate that led to the election of Dalla Torre.
Art. 13 of the Constitutional Charter of the Order, in force today, prescribes that “The Grand Master is elected for life … from among the Professed Knights, with at least ten years of Perpetual Vows, if they are less than fifty years old; for the Professed Knights of higher age, who have been members of the Order for at least ten years, three years of Perpetual Vows are sufficient”. (paragraph 1), and then continues: “The Grand Master and the Lieutenant of the Grand Master must meet the noble requirements prescribed for the category of Knights of Honour and Devotion.” (paragraph 2). What does this mean?
For non-experts, the Grand Master of the Order of Malta cannot but be an aristocrat (which also seems logical to us for an Order that qualifies as “noble”); and the Constitution provides that the Head of the Order is chosen not “from among the knights of honour and devotion” (who may have been included in this category also with a “motu proprio”, also for particular merits, without having the right to do so heraldically) but that he “has the requisites required to be admitted among the knights of honour and devotion”: 4/4 (= both father’s and mother’s side) of nobility for 200 years, or: 250 years of nobility for the paternal line in addition to 200 years of the other 2/4 in addition to the amnesty for an grandfather, or: 300 years paternal line in addition to 200 years of the other 2/4 in addition to the amnesty for an grandfather, or: 350 years, paternal line in addition to 200 years of another quarter, or: 450 years paternal line.
This was one of the rules that the reform was supposed to modify, at least allowing for the possibility to range among the professed members (called “first class”), perhaps extending (this was the hypothesis) eligibility also to knights of grace and devotion (which would be the step immediately below honour and devotion), but this was not the case. And therefore the rule in force is the one mentioned above.
Given this, who could be elected Grand Master given these rules? Well, the game is complex because, on closer inspection, there is not a wide selection from which to chose. Some are candidates “only on paper”, such as Friar Luigi Naselli of Gela (born in 1930, former Grand Prior of Naples and Sicily, resigned for health reasons) and Friar Gherardo Hercolani Fava Simonetti (born in 1941, also a former Grand Commander, but very ill health); finally there would be Friar Pierre de Bizemont (born in 1944, the only French professed with eligibility requirements). Naturally, the former Grand Master Festing, born in 1949, must be added to these few eligible candidates, and perhaps put before him, for whom technically the great return is not excluded, considering the controversial resignation that followed.
The same Grand Commander could not be elected, coming from the ranks of the knights of grace and devotion, as well as the Italians fra’ Carlo d’Ippolito di Sant’Ippolito (an energetic Calabrian gentleman born in 1933, former Grand Commander) and fra’ Marco Luzzago (born in 1950, “commendatore di giustizia”, in charge of the castle of Magione), also admitted as knights of grace and devotion. To be excluded, of course, all the other professed from the other ranks.
There would then be hypotheses that would benefit a hypothetical Italian reconquest of Via Condotti, because there could also be another professed knight with the noble requisites provided for in art. 13, paragraph 2, but who is lacking those provided for in paragraph 1, such as the forty-four year old Friulan Fra’ Nicolò Custoza de Cattani (who took the solemn vows in 2016, but would have to wait until 2026 to be eligible). And then there is another Italian, who, however, today is on the verge of achieving the requirements of solemn profession: he is Friar Alessandro de Franciscis from Campania, born in 1955, the current director of the Bureau Médical of Lourdes, who would complete his three years of profession next December. Therefore, in a hypothetical procrastination linked to the contingencies of covid-19, the hypothesis of his election could also materialize. However, de Franciscis is not only a highly esteemed doctor who plays a role of clear prestige in one of the most important Marian shrines in Christendom, but also has a political past among the ranks of the centre-left area (former DC, then Margherita, UDEUR, Democratic Party) which led him to hold the position of president of the province of Caserta in 2005 and to be unpleasantly involved in legal problems inherent in that position, which were then resolved positively for him. Certainly since 2009 he has not been in politics, but it is known that in certain circles certain things never cease to be considered, especially when it comes to electing what, though sui generis, is still a Head of State.
Of course, the whole issue will be played out over time, which will certainly not be lacking given the circumstances surrounding the pandemic. It has to be said, however, that the Code which regulates the life of the Order and in art. 145 sets the time for the convocation of the Council of State (the elective body of the Grand Master, which constitutes a sort of “parliament” of the Order, in which the Grand Priories and national associations are also represented) at a maximum of three months, and therefore the time for hypothetical alliances is not so long; unless an exception to this rule is made, but even this is only a ‘school’ hypothesis.
It is clear, however, that, net of this, the influence of the German management of the Order, orchestrated by the ineffable Boeselager, will not delay in making itself felt. He certainly has almost all the national associations in his grip – a little more recalcitrant than the others – the Italian one, led by the Sicilian Riccardo Paternò di Montecupo, to which, although it has more members than the others, was arbitrarily prevented from expressing preference in the last elections in 2018 on the grounds that Italy was already represented by the three Grand Priories (two of which were already commissariats at the time) – and clearly can count on a sprawling system of control based on the management and distribution of economic funds and diplomatic privileges (just think of the choice of all the Order’s diplomats – among whom we recall the son of the very powerful former commander of the Vatican Gendarmerie Domenico Giani, now torpedoed by Pope Bergoglio). The professed (not only those “born noble”), on the other hand, are numerically few and above all appear very disorganized and demoralized; theirs is a stalemate, which seems to have neither breath nor room for action.
It is not excluded, however, that in all this the Holy See, through the special delegate Becciu, can once again extend its paw towards the Order, exercising a leading role in the election procedures, perhaps leading to the choice of a Lieutenant to temporarily hold the Order and ferry it towards the much sought after reform. But also the Lieutenant must have the requisites foreseen for the Grand Master (as we saw before quoting art. 13 par. 2 of the Constitutional Charter), and therefore the problem of the choice is also proposed, but in this case, it would be limited to only one year of government, in order to be able, at the moment of electing the new Grand Master, to range over several candidates. On the other hand, however, if this were to happen, the fracture linked to the consideration of the, albeit peculiar, sovereignty of the Order, which would be in some way vitiated by a form of external interference, would open up again.
In addition, however things go, the question of the “Cardinalis Patronus” comes up again, a position from which Raymond Burke has never been formally removed; the American Cardinal, who certainly does not need captions, elegantly never claimed any role after his ousting, which in fact created a “freeze” of his function, but considering that the rules of the Order assign to his office some tasks related to these phases, an honest definition of the problem would be desirable.
Naturally, these are political hypotheses. But the situation may not be as tragic as one thinks, and on the contrary, trusting in the strengthening of a “resistant” group, the pars sanior of the Order could take advantage of the moment for a change of course towards a more responsible autonomy and a better awareness of its past.
Let us watch.
§ § §
We were told that in our above essay of yesterday there are inaccuracies and incompleteness. We correct them here:
First of all, to the Italians should be added Fra Roggero Caccia Dominioni, Grand Prior Emeritus of Lombardy and Venice, who, however, is over ninety years old and does not enjoy excellent health … ; then it should be noted that both Fra’ Carlo d’Ippolito di Sant’Ippolito and Fra’ Marco Luzzago (who is Commendatore di Giustizia but does not reside at the Castello di Magione but at Villa Ciccolini, in Macerata) were received into the Order as Knights of Grace and Devotion and then integrated the evidence of nobility and have (as they say in technical jargon) “healed the missing quarters”, thus proving to have those requirements to be admitted among the Knights of Honour and Devotion. This practice – which at the time also followed the late Grand Master Fra’ Giacomo – is consolidated within the Order, since genealogical research can often be perfected over time, thus enabling the Order to integrate its process of nobility with new suitable and appropriate evidence.
To the eligible professed already indicated must then be added:
Brother Ludwig Hoffmann von Rumerstein, Austrian, born in 1937, former Grand Commander who was interim lieutenant in the transition phase immediately following Festing’s resignation;
Brother Karel Paar, born 1934, Grand Prior Emeritus of Bohemia;
Fra’ Elie de Comminges, French, born in 1935, who had been missing from the Order’s public life for several years;
Brother Ludwig von Call, Tyrolean, born 1934, professor of chemistry in Innsbruck.
Finally, they point out that although it is true that Friar Alexander de Franciscis will theoretically reach the proportion between years of age and years of profession required by Art. 13 of the Constitutional Charter next December, he lacks another requirement that the same article provides for in a not inconsiderable aside, namely that of being a member of the Order “for at least ten years”, having been received only in 2012.
The circle, therefore, between the old and the wretched, closes on de Bizemont, Luzzago, Paar, von Call… and Festing.
There are also twists and turns… If we were English, we could also place a bet on it.
Meanwhile, a ramshackle obituary informs us that the funeral of the late Grand Master will be held (it is not known when) “in a restricted manner” in the Church of Villa Malta on the Aventine (extraterritorial), announcing the celebration of “a solemn Requiem Mass on a date to be defined”. No mention of State funerals. Boh.
§ § §
THIS ARTICLE PRESUPPOSES THAT THE PANDEMIC IS REAL, WHICH IT IS NOT
But even if it were, the way the Bishops have closed Churches
is completely contrary to the Gospel:
Anti-Pope, Anti-Church, Anti-Bishops, Anti-Gospel, Anti-Parishes
Pastoral Remedies in Time of the Corona Panic
By Philip C. L. Gray, JCL
I turn now to apply the principles noted above and answer some of the questions we have received.
1. Does a diocesan bishop have the authority to cancel “non-essential” activities in a parish, such as Stations of the Cross, CCD, bible studies, etc.?
Generally speaking, no. A pastor is the administrator of his parish. Under jurisprudence, it is the pastor, not the bishop, who can set Mass schedules. I have won and lost cases because of that jurisprudence. That being true, it would be the pastor, not the bishop, who is entrusted with making decisions about what is essential and what is not. He should do so with guidelines from the bishop, but not prohibitions. This is the principle of subsidiarity at work. The pastor should also prudently weigh the circumstances, risks and benefits associated with his decision.
2. What are the canonical issues involved with a bishop shuttering churches and suspending all public Masses?
For a bishop to do this, he must issue a decree that is motivated in fact and specific to the circumstances he is addressing. The decree must be properly promulgated and thereby actionable; that is, open to challenge. More at issue is that the faithful have a Divine Law right to the sacraments. Personally, I do not believe such a directive is legitimate but the circumstances for appeal would be too burdensome and probably not resolved until after the pandemic has passed. For this reason, the Faithful are encouraged to find other, more favorable ways to obtain the sacraments while also petitioning their bishop to provide the sacraments. The Faithful should also use acceptable means to persuade a bishop to allow public Masses with prudent measures implemented.
3. What canonical arguments exist in favor of a pastor continuing to celebrate the sacraments for his people?
See #2 above. The vocation of a pastor is to minister to the spiritual needs of his people out of the Word of God and the Sacraments. Just as a parent’s obligations to children are not suspended when a crisis occurs, neither is a pastor’s. The Faithful have a right to receive the sacraments, and this places an obligation on a priest to provide them. In danger of death, the obligation to provide is extended to those priests who no longer have ordinary faculties.
4. Can a person be required to receive Holy Communion in the hand during the Coronavirus?
No, not legitimately. This will be disputed, and the person refused Holy Communion will likely not see a decision in their case until after the crisis is past. A greater concern is that such refusal will become normative. If a person is refused Holy Communion on the tongue, that person will be faced with a hard decision to appeal or not. The SJF is ready to assist anyone in making that discernment.
5. What is necessary to confect the Eucharist, as opposed to what may be in the rubrics or a part of custom?
As per any sacrament, to confect the Eucharist requires valid matter, form, and intention. For the Eucharist, valid matter is unleavened bread (in the Latin Church and most Eastern Catholic Churches) and pure grape wine. The form is the words, “This is My Body” and “This is My Blood” said at the appropriate time. The priest must intend to confect the Eucharist. The “breathing” on the species during consecration is a beautiful custom but is not obligatory. Consequently, a priest who wears a mask during the celebration of Mass, or distributes Holy Communion with gloves, or uses other precautions that do not affect the matter, form or intention, do not harm the validity of the Mass. Such precautions should be taken in collaboration with the bishop.
6. Can a priest use soap or hand sanitizer during the purification of his hands during Mass?
The rubrics call for water. Adding lemon juice or even isopropyl alcohol to the water as a disinfectant would not, in my opinion, affect the liceity of the act. Doing so would be far less offensive to the rubrics than wearing gloves to distribute Holy Communion, which itself could be reasonable during this crisis.
7. Can extraordinary ministers be used in lieu of the presiding priest so the priest can remain socially distant and lessen the risk of being exposed to the virus? Can extraordinary ministers self-communicate for the same reasons?
Yes to both. These measures should be taken in collaboration with the bishop, but if such collaboration is not possible, a presiding priest can make those decisions in extraordinary circumstances. None of those examples affect the validity of the Sacrament.
8. Should a priest disobey his bishop if his bishop orders that all public sacraments are to cease?
This is a tricky question for some and easy for others. The answer should not be taken lightly. A priest vows obedience to his bishop, so the question behind the question is, “What is the obedience he vowed?” As a virtue, obedience flows from Justice. It is giving to authority what is due that authority. As Christians, all of us must be obedient to lawful authority. It’s part of what we believe. On the other hand, all authority has limits, and the first limits that must be respected are the limits imposed by Faith and Morals. When that authority acts in a manner contrary to Faith or Morals, we have no obligation to obey. He may have the power to act, but such acts are illegitimate insofar as they violate Divine Law, either Positive or Natural. The right of the Faithful to receive the sacraments is a matter of Divine Law. Whether providing them at a particular time is appropriate or not is something the minister of that sacrament must determine at that time. If a bishop prohibits the public exercise of sacraments during this crisis, and a priest has concerns, the priest should prayerfully consider the circumstances of the prohibition as they relate to him and the people under his care. He must consider the norm of Canon 18 and other applicable laws, what faculties the Church provides, what opportunities for grace exist for the people, and what his options are. He should express his concerns to his bishop, even asking the bishop to reconsider if necessary. If he chooses not to obey the directive, he must be certain in his conscience that he is being obedient to God. Put another way, a priest should always obey a legitimate directive from his bishop.
by Karl Denninger
Reprinted from Market-Ticker.org
With more than 19.4 million people residents, the preliminary results indicate that at least 2.7 million New Yorkers have been infected with Covid-19.
The official data is that 257,000, roughly, NY State residents have had it. The real number is 10x higher or more.
This in turn means the fatality rate is 10x lower or more.
And that, in turn, means that:
- The risk of death is no greater than that of a bad seasonal flu. This makes all of the lockdown and other suspension/mitigation measures worthless, as they were unjustified in fact and in law. There is no basis for continuing any of them for even one more day. That includes masks, “social distancing” restrictions or anything else.
- The capability to “track and trace” is a literal zero since 90% or more of the cases will never be recorded by anyone. Therefore all claims of “track and trace” or anything related to it are not only unjustified they’re criminally insane or intended for other purposes.
Folks, the game’s over. This is not the first such study but it’s the largest and in one of the “hot spots” — in fact, the hot spot.
The scientific facts are now in. There is no scientific reason for any governor to support or allow any lockdown or suspension of any sort to continue for even one more day. There is no reason predicated on science for any citizen to follow any such direction for even one more day.
IF the governors do not immediately lift, and our President does not immediately demand the lifting of all such orders right here, right now, within the next hour then the government at both State and Federal levels is entirely illegitimate, it is now committing felony kidnapping and there is just cause for it to be removed and replaced by any means necessary.
The debate, on the science, is over.
FromRome.Info publishes here its English translation of a letter by an anonymous Catholic nun, here in Italy, interpreting the signs of the times. It was sent to Aldo Maria Valli, and you can read it in Italian at his site.
I have read with lively interest your interview of Father Alfredo Morselli. Truly, it is a great insight, on his part, to have known how to find that, in the language of Dante, one might see a counterpoint in every happening.
Father Morelli, in his reply to one of your questions, says: “See: Communion was given to all, even if in the state of sin, and to the Lutherans in Germany, and now no one can make Holy Communion. Worship was given to idols in the Vatican and in Saint Peter’s, and now Saint Peter’s will not have the rites for Holy Week with the faithful. The Church in China was betrayed and sold to the Chinese regime, and from China has come the virus. With the Synod on Amazonia, nature was glorified and considered even a source of theological doctrine, and now she is showing — on account of the original sin — that she is not a tiger who is easily ridden. A plot was begun to give wives to priests, and now priests are without their spouse, their parish. Is it not as if there is coming to pass what is said in the book of Wisdom, “… That they might know that by what things a man sinneth, by the same also he is tormented.” (Wisdom 11:17)
For my part, to the list made by Father Morselli, even though with great reluctance (and with that prayer with which those called by God see and comprehend), I would add two other aspects.
They obligated all the nuns to leave their beloved cloisters with the most extreme threats, and now they are subject to cloister with the most extreme threats against anyone who leaves it.
In recent days, they made decisions by administrative process concerning matters which required the power of a legislator, and now the Italian government, falling into the same abuse, is deciding with administrative acts who, how, where and in what manner one may worship God.
God help us!