| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 283 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 281 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
Pius XII’s Fatima vision ...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:55 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 61
|
A Masonic Echo in Dignita...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:13 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 62
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:09 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 172
|
After Fifty Years, Archbi...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Today, 05:56 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 47
|
Archbishop Viganò: Messag...
Forum: Archbishop Viganò
Last Post: Stone
Today, 05:41 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 70
|
Daily pilgrimage to purga...
Forum: For the Souls in Purgatory
Last Post: SAguide
Yesterday, 07:38 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 4,969
|
Prominent COVID jab criti...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:58 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 99
|
Twenty-fourth Sunday afte...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 07:17 AM
» Replies: 4
» Views: 8,097
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 07:10 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 4,924
|
From Fr. Shouppe's 'Purga...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
11-03-2024, 06:16 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 94
|
|
|
| Pope Francis signs document saying ‘differences in religion’ are part of ‘God’s will in creation’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-19-2022, 05:11 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- Replies (2)
|
 |
Pope Francis signs document saying ‘differences in religion’ are part of ‘God’s will in creation’
The Declaration echoes the 2019 Abu Dhabi document, which received widespread criticism from Catholics for the apparent dangers which it presented to the faith.
![[Image: pope-francis-kazakhstan-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/pope-francis-kazakhstan-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis delivering his address at the Congress of World and Traditional Religions in Kazakhstan, September 15, 2022.
Vatican News video screenshot
Sep 15, 2022
UPDATE: The Congress has withdrawn the original Declaration and issued a new one since this article was published. Paragraph 10 now reads: “We note that pluralism in terms of differences in skin color, gender, race, language and culture are expressions of the wisdom of God in creation. Religious diversity is permitted by God and, therefore, any coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.”
NUR-SULTAN, Kazakhstan (LifeSiteNews [adapted]) – Pope Francis has joined ecumenical and political leaders in signing a document stating that the “pluralism and differences in religion…are expressions of the wisdom of God’s will in creation.”
The declaration, which can be downloaded here with English text at the end of the document, was the culmination of the 7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions held in Kazakhstan.
It was read aloud by the leaders of the Congress on September 15, feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, after which Pope Francis delivered an address echoing the themes and language of the Declaration.
The Declaration, which Pope Francis joined in signing, contains a paragraph stating that God willed the plurality of religions which are present in the world. Paragraph 10 reads: “We note that pluralism and differences in religion, skin color, gender, race and language are expressions of the wisdom of God’s will in creation. Thus any incident of coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.” (Emphasis original)
–– Update: The Congress has withdrawn the original Declaration and issued a new one since this article was published. Paragraph 10 now reads: “We note that pluralism in terms of differences in skin color, gender, race, language and culture are expressions of the wisdom of God in creation. Religious diversity is permitted by God and, therefore, any coercion to a particular religion and religious doctrine is unacceptable.”
The Declaration also noted how the Congress participants “stand in solidarity with the efforts of the United Nations and all other international, governmental and regional institutions and organizations, to promote dialogue among civilizations and religions, states and nations.” (Emphasis original)
![[Image: Screenshot-2022-09-15-at-15.35.55.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Screenshot-2022-09-15-at-15.35.55.png)
The roundtable of participants and religious leaders at the Congress
The Kazakhstan Declaration paid homage to, and noted its dependance on, the Abu Dhabi document which Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed el-Tayeb, signed in February 2019. That document itself has been described as seeming to “overturn the doctrine of the Gospel.”
“We recognize the importance and value of the Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together between the Holy See and Al-Azhar Al-Sharif,” read the Kazakh Declaration.
The Declaration also stated that “We pay special attention to the importance of strengthening the institution of the family,” but in his closing remarks, Kazakhstan’s president Kassym-Jomart Tokayev said that the meeting had paid particular attention to digital and “gender issues.”
![[Image: kazakhstan-address.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/kazakhstan-address.jpg)
Pope Francis delivering his address at the Congress
Kazakhstan’s link to Abu Dhabi document
The recent Declaration almost repeats the Abu Dhabi document word for word, for the 2019 document stated: “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings.”
At the time, Bishop Athanasius Schneider – auxiliary of Astana, Kazakhstan – raised concerns about that passage in the Abu Dhabi document. He was later told in a private meeting with Pope Francis in 2019 that the text only referred to “the permissive will of God,” not the positive will.
According to Bishop Schneider, in implementing the Abu Dhabi document without correcting its erroneous affirmation on the diversity of religions, “men in the Church not only betray Jesus Christ as the only Savior of mankind and the necessity of His Church for eternal salvation, but also commit a great injustice and sin against love of neighbor.”
Following his meeting with the Pope, and in light of Francis’ repeated promotion of the document, Bishop Schneider warned that the Abu Dhabi document was directly linked to problematic passages from Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae [Emphasis - The Catacombs].
RELATED: Bishop Schneider: There is no divine positive will or natural right to the diversity of religions
He stated:
Quote:“Dignitatis Humanae’s assertion that man has a natural right (positively willed by God) not to be impeded in choosing, exercising and spreading, even publicly, any form of religion according to his conscience, and the Abu Dhabi Document’s assertion that God wills the diversity of religions, in the same way as He wills positively the diversity of sex (based on man’s nature itself), will surely one day be corrected by the Papal Magisterium of the Cathedra of St. Peter — the cathedra veritatis.”
He later added that:
Quote:“It contradicts Divine Revelation to say that, just as God positively wills the diversity of the male and female sexes and the diversity of nations, so in the same way he also wills the diversity of religions.”
Conclusion of the VII Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions
Prior to the signing of the Kazakhstan Declaration today, Bishop Schneider told the assembled media that the entire Congress risked undermining teaching regarding the primacy of the Catholic faith.
Speaking after Pope Francis met with Kazakhstan clergy, Bishop Schneider said that “the congress as such has a good aim to promote mutual respect and understanding in the world today.” Yet he noted how “it has also a danger because it could give the impression of a ‘supermarket of religions’ and this is not correct because there is only one true religion, which is the Catholic Church, founded by God himself.”
The bishop added that Francis’ strong support for the Congress could suggest that Catholicism is on a par with other religions. “This is not correct because there is only one true religion, which is the Catholic Church, founded by God himself, but commanded to all man, to all religions, to believe and accept his son Jesus Christ, the only Savior,” he said.
Yesterday, Pope Francis delivered his opening address to the Congress, in which he pushed for numerous religions and decried “proselytism and indoctrination.” The Pontiff also appeared to contradict previous Papal teaching regarding the promotion of other religions, saying that everyone “has the right to render public testimony to his or her own creed, proposing it without ever imposing it.”
|
|
|
| Pope refuses to defend Cdl. Zen ahead of trial in Communist China, calls for ‘dialogue’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-17-2022, 04:48 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope refuses to defend Cdl. Zen ahead of trial in Communist China, calls for ‘dialogue’
'In order to understand we have chosen the path of dialogue,' said Pope Francis when asked about China.
![[Image: francis-plane-kazakhstan-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/francis-plane-kazakhstan-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis delivers remarks while on the papal plane, September 15, 2022
Video screenshot
Sep 16, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – Pope Francis has described Communist China as “not undemocratic” and refused to support Hong Kong’s Cardinal Joseph Zen as he prepares to go on trial in the country on September 19.
Speaking to reporters on board the papal plane from Kazakhstan to come on Thursday, Pope Francis fielded questions about China and the Vatican’s relation with the Communist state.
“To understand China takes a century, and we do not live for a century,” he said vaguely. He described the Chinese mentality as “a rich mentality, and when it gets a little sick, it loses its richness; it is capable of making mistakes. In order to understand we have chosen the path of dialogue, open to dialogue.”
Deal going ‘well, slowly’
Referencing the Vatican’s controversial deal with China, Francis said it was “going well, slowly, because the Chinese pace is slow, they have an eternity to go forward: they are a people of endless patience.”
READ: Pope Francis’ deal with Communist China has led to greater persecution of Catholics
Without mentioning any specifics of the deal, the Pope added how “it is not easy to understand the Chinese mentality, but it should be respected, I always respect this.”
Francis praised Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin for his role in chairing the “dialogue commission” with Chinese authorities – a process that “is going well,” he said, lauding Parolin’s purported knowledge of China. “It is a slow process, but steps forward are always being made.”
Cardinal Zen’s trial not unexpected?
When asked whether he considered the trial against Cardinal Zen a “violation of religious freedom,” Francis appeared to suggest that the trial was not unexpected.
“Qualifying China as undemocratic, I do not identify with that, because it’s such a complex country … yes, it is true that there are things that seem undemocratic to us, that is true. Cardinal Zen is going to trial these days, I think. And he says what he feels, and you can see that there are limitations there.”
Francis ended his comments with a confusing phrase, committing himself only to supporting “dialogue” rather than the cardinal. “More than qualifying, because it is difficult, and I do wish to qualify, they are impressions, and I try to support the path of dialogue.”
Cardinal Zen, the emeritus bishop of Hong Kong, was arrested in May under the terms of the draconian 2020 national security law. He was taken into police custody along with four other trustees of the 612 Humanitarian Relief Fund. The Fund was established to offer “legal, medical, psychological and emergency financial assistance” to those involved in the 2019 protests against the government’s Extradition Law Amendment Bill, which would allow prisoners to be transferred to China for trial.
Cardinal Zen’s arrest sparked outrage across the world among political leaders, China experts, and faithful Catholics. However, the Vatican was notably silent at first, only issuing a subdued statement long after others had issued far more forthright expressions of outrage.
Meanwhile Cardinal Parolin downplayed suggestions that Zen’s arrest would impede the renewal of the secretive deal the Vatican has made with China. Parolin instead voiced his hope that “initiatives such as this one will not complicate the already complex and not simple path of dialogue between the Holy See and the Church in China.”
Zen will now face trial starting September 19.
The Vatican’s secretive deal with China was first established in 2018 and later renewed in 2020. It is up for renewal again this fall, and though still secret, it allegedly recognizes the state-approved church and allows the Chinese Communist Party to appoint bishops. The Pope apparently maintains a veto power although in practice it is the CCP who have control. It also allegedly allows for the removal of legitimate bishops to be replaced by CCP approved bishops.
Cardinal Zen has long been a vocal critic of the deal, accusing Francis of “encouraging a schism” and “selling out the Catholic Church in China.” He styled the deal “an incredible betrayal.”
China too busy for Pope Francis
Of note, even though Chinese President Xi Jinping was in Kazakhstan at the same time as Pope Francis this week, Xi refused to meet the Pope, citing a lack of time.
Reuters reported that a “Vatican source” revealed the Vatican had made “an expression of availability” towards the Chinese, who “appreciated the gesture,” but turned down the offer for Francis and Xi to meet.
But Benedict Rogers, co-founder and chief executive of Hong Kong Watch, suggested the snub was a display of power from Beijing.
Quote:That #China #CCP #XiJinping refused to meet @Pontifex, despite the Vatican’s kowtowing & silence on #UyghurGenocide, #Tibet, dismantling of #HongKong‘s freedoms, should tell the Vatican everything about the dangers & futility of its current approachhttps://t.co/6zVaAMAiql
— Benedict Rogers 羅傑斯 (@benedictrogers) September 16, 2022
|
|
|
|
| Bishops, priests and scholars correct Pope Francis’ statement on Holy Communion |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-17-2022, 04:34 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Bishops, priests and scholars correct Pope Francis’ statement on Holy Communion
A recent papal statement seems to open the door to Holy Communion for pro-abortion politicians such as Nancy Pelosi
![[Image: GettyImages-619459418-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/GettyImages-619459418-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis
Photo by Michael Campanella/Getty Images
Sep 16, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) — Four bishops, several priests, and numerous Catholic scholars have signed a statement rebuking Pope Francis for a recent statement about the reception of Holy Communion, according to which “everyone is invited to the supper of the wedding of the Lamb (Re 19:9). To be admitted to the feast all that is required is the wedding garment of faith which comes from the hearing of his Word.” The Pope wrote these words in his June 29 Apostolic Letter on the liturgy, Desiderio desideravi, but for the signatories of this new statement (see full text below), he omitted the “essential topic of repentance for sin for the worthy reception of the Eucharist.”
Therefore, the papal words about the “garment of faith” as the only requirement for the reception of Holy Communion, “contradict[] the faith of the Catholic Church,” as the authors wrote. They explain:
Quote:The Catholic Church has always taught that in order to receive the Holy Eucharist worthily and without sin, Catholics must receive sacramental absolution, if possible, for any mortal sins they may have committed and obey all other laws of the Church concerning reception of the Eucharist (as, for example, the laws concerning fasting prior to reception of the Eucharist).
If a sacramental confession is not possible, but the reception of Holy Communion urgent (such as for a priest celebrating Mass), the Sacrament of Penance has to be sought as soon as possible afterwards, and the penitent must have perfect contrition for his mortal sins. By extensively quoting from the Council of Trent’s documents, the signatories also make it clear that such teachings as presented in Pope Francis’ document have already been condemned as heresy. “The claim,” they write, “that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy.”
This false teaching might become more important now at this historic moment. Only in May, a U.S. Bishop – Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone – publicly banned Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, from receiving Holy Communion because she is defying the Church’s teaching against abortion. “A Catholic legislator,” he then wrote, “who supports procured abortion, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin which is a cause of most serious scandal to others.”
It nearly looks as if Pope Francis’s June 2022 document is a response to that diocesan ruling, now stating that faith alone is sufficient for receiving Holy Communion.
As the new statement points out, “on the day that Desiderio desideravi was issued, Pope Francis received in audience Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives,” and on that day, she received Holy Communion at a papal Mass, in St. Peter’s, over which Pope Francis presided, thereby “causing scandal to Catholics over all the world,” in the statement’s words. The text continues: “When asked about her illegal reception of communion, Pope Francis expressed no disapproval of it. Instead, he responded by saying ‘When the Church loses its pastoral nature, when a bishop loses his pastoral nature, it causes a political problem. That’s all I can say.’ This response rebukes Archbishop Cordileone for his justified application of Canon 915.”
Among the signatories of this new statement are Bishop Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop André Gracida, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Bishop Robert Mutsaerts, Father Gerald E. Murray, Father James Altman, Father John Lovell and several other priests, along with well-known academic teachers such as Professor Claudio Pierantoni, Dr. John Lamont, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, Professor Anna Silvas, Dr. Anthony Esolen, Professor John Rist, and Professor Paolo Pasqualucci. Among Catholic scholars can be found Julia Meloni and George Neumayr. LifeSite’s John-Henry Westen and Liz Yore also signed the document.
The new statement by clergymen and scholars also refers back to the Code of Canon Law, especially can. 915 (and more), which lays down the same rules about the worthy reception of Holy Communion as presented above. The signatories state:
Quote:The purpose of these canons is to prevent grave sin on the part of the person unworthily receiving the Eucharist, to prevent scandal, and to prevent the desecration of the sacrament by such unworthy reception. These canons are still in force. They cannot be validly repealed, because their content expresses the divine law concerning the Eucharist that is taught in the Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradition.
In a sense, one could see this new statement by Pope Francis, on faith being the only condition for receiving Holy Communion, as a linchpin and summary statement of his pontificate. Early on, from 2014 on, he promoted the idea of giving Holy Communion to unrepentant remarried divorcees; then he opened up the idea of Protestants following their own conscience when deciding to receive Holy Communion.
In addition, the Pope has been encouraging pro-abortion Catholics to receive Holy Communion and even called pro-LGBT advocate Father James Martin, S.J. as a Vatican counsellor. In all of these cases, the Pope allows Catholics to receive Holy Communion who are objectively violating the Church’s laws and teachings, thus promoting moral relativism.
LifeSite asked Professor Claudio Pierantoni, one of the signatories of this new statement, to comment on the papal words in light of the above-mentioned case of Nancy Pelosi. He wrote:
Quote:We have thought necessary to issue this statement because this error can lead to great scandal, like that of admitting to Communion politicians who publicly approve of abortion, or even promote it directly with their actions. This is precisely what has been happening recently in the US, after the ruling of the Supreme Court that overturned the infamous Roe versus Wade, when President Biden and Speaker Pelosi, both Catholic, openly supported the campaign in favor of restoring the “right” to abortion all over the country. The pope not only omitted to rebuke Biden and Pelosi for this scandalous stance; not only omitted to support those bishops who did implement canonical censures against such politicians, but went to the extreme of criticizing those bishops (though making no names), arguing that such censures (like excommunication), “are not pastoral,” and “cause political problems.”
Now this papal document (Desiderio desideravi) affirming that “the garment of faith” is “all that is required” to be admitted to the Eucharistic banquet, seems to provide a theological justification for this attitude, which could have been thought to be simply the result of political opportunism. This scandal had moreover a striking confirmation through the coincidence that Nancy Pelosi received Holy Communion in St. Peter’s basilica, on the feast of Peter and Paul, the very same day in which Desiderio desideravi was published. Such an attitude on the part of the pope is, of course, the opposite of true “pastorality,” since the first duty of the spiritual pastor is to warn the sinner, and particularly the public sinner, not only of the seriousness of his fault, but of the immense damage that is caused to millions of Catholics who are thereby deceived and led to think that this can be an acceptable and orthodox behavior.
Please see here the full statement, with the list of signatories at the end of the text. A pdf of the statement can be downloaded HERE and a Spanish version HERE.
The teaching of the Catholic faith on the reception of the Holy Eucharist
The recent Apostolic Letter Desiderio desideravi, given June 29th 2022, the Feast of SS. Peter and Paul, states:
Quote:The world still does not know it, but everyone is invited to the supper of the wedding of the Lamb (Re 19:9). To be admitted to the feast all that is required is the wedding garment of faith which comes from the hearing of his Word (cf. Ro 10:17). [Il mondo ancora non lo sa, ma tutti sono invitati al banchetto di nozze dell’Agnello (Ap 19,9). Per accedervi occorre solo l’abito nuziale della fede che viene dall’ascolto della sua Parola (cfr. Rm 10,17)[…].
The natural meaning of these words is that the only requirement for a Catholic to worthily receive the Holy Eucharist is possession of the virtue of faith, by which one believes Christian teaching on the grounds of its being divinely revealed. Moreover, in the Apostolic Letter as a whole there is silence on this essential topic of repentance for sin for the worthy reception of the Eucharist.
This natural meaning contradicts the faith of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has always taught that in order to receive the Holy Eucharist worthily and without sin, Catholics must receive sacramental absolution, if possible, for any mortal sins they may have committed and obey all other laws of the Church concerning reception of the Eucharist (as, for example, the laws concerning fasting prior to reception of the Eucharist). However, if a Catholic is unable to confess mortal sins but has a grave reason for receiving the Eucharist (such as a priest who may be required to celebrate Mass at a given time but who is unable to go to Confession), such a person must be confident to the best of his ability that he have perfect contrition for any mortal sins that he may have committed.
The claim that faith is the only requirement for worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist was condemned by the Council of Trent as a heresy.
The holy and ecumenical Council of Trent, Decree concerning the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist (October 11th 1551).
Quote:Chapter VII. The Preparation that Must be Employed to Receive the Holy Eucharist Worthily
If it is not becoming for anyone to approach any of the sacred functions except solemnly, certainly, the more the holiness and the divinity of this heavenly sacrament is understood by a Christian, the more diligently ought he to take heed lest he approach to receive it without great reverence and holiness [can. 2], especially when we read in the Apostle those words full of terror: “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself not discerning the body of the Lord” [1 Cor. 11 :29 ]. Therefore, the precept, “Let a man prove himself” [1 Cor. 11:28], must be recalled to mind by him who wishes to communicate. Now ecclesiastical usage declares that this examination is necessary, that no one conscious of mortal sin, however contrite he may seem to himself, should approach the Holy Eucharist without a previous sacramental confession. This, the holy Synod has decreed, is always to be observed by all Christians, even by those priests on whom by their office it may be incumbent to celebrate, provided the recourses of a confessor be not lacking to them. But if in an urgent necessity a priest should celebrate without previous confession, let him confess as soon as possible.
…
Canon 11. If anyone says that faith alone is sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist, let him be anathema. [Si quis dixerit, solam fidem esse sufficientem praeparationem ad sumendum sanctissimum eucharistiae sacramentum, anathema sit.]
This claim also contradicts Canons 915 and 916 of the Latin Code of Canon Law, and Canons 711 and 712 of the Oriental Code of Canon Law.
Latin Code of Canon Law
Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.
Oriental Code of Canon Law
Canon 711. A person who is conscious of serious sin is not to celebrate the Divine Liturgy nor receive the Divine Eucharist unless a serious reason is present and there is no opportunity of receiving the sacrament of penance; in this case the person should make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible.
Canon 712. Those who are publicly unworthy are forbidden from receiving the Divine Eucharist.
The purpose of these canons is to prevent grave sin on the part of the person unworthily receiving the Eucharist, to prevent scandal, and to prevent the desecration of the sacrament by such unworthy reception. These canons are still in force. They cannot be validly repealed, because their content expresses the divine law concerning the Eucharist that is taught in the Holy Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. This has been pointed out in the Declaration of June 24th 2000 by the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, concerning the admission to Holy Communion of faithful who are divorced and remarried:
The Code of Canon Law establishes that “Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion” (can. 915). … The prohibition found in the cited canon, by its nature, is derived from divine law and transcends the domain of positive ecclesiastical laws: the latter cannot introduce legislative changes which would oppose the doctrine of the Church. The scriptural text on which the ecclesial tradition has always relied is that of St. Paul: “This means that whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily sins against the body and blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first only then should he eat of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks without recognizing the body eats and drinks a judgment on himself.”
Pope Francis has indicated by his words and actions that he holds the view expressed by the natural meaning of the words of Desiderio desideravi cited above.
In his Angelus for the feast of “Corpus Domini” on June 6, 2021, Pope Francis said:
Quote:… there is another strength that stands out in the fragility of the Eucharist: the strength to love those who make mistakes. It is on the night he is betrayed that Jesus gives us the Bread of Life. He gives us the greatest gift while he feels the deepest abyss in his heart: the disciple who eats with Him, who dips the morsel in the same plate, is betraying Him. And betrayal is the worst suffering for one who loves. And what does Jesus do? He reacts to the evil with a greater good. He responds to Judas’ ‘no’ with the ‘yes’ of mercy. He does not punish the sinner, but rather gives His life for him; He pays for him. When we receive the Eucharist, Jesus does the same with us: he knows us; he knows we are sinners; and he knows we make many mistakes, but he does not give up on joining his life to ours. He knows that we need it, because the Eucharist is not the reward of saints, no, it is the Bread of sinners. This is why he exhorts us: “Do not be afraid! Take and eat.”
The statement that the Eucharist is not the reward of saints but the bread of sinners might be understood in an orthodox sense if taken in isolation. However, placed in the context of the reception of the Eucharist by Judas referred to in the Angelus address (cf. John 13:23-27), and in the context of Pope Francis’s other words and actions, it suggests that renunciation of sin is not necessary for one’s reception of the Eucharist to be acceptable to God. This view is borne out in the following statement from Desiderio desideravi: ‘Indeed, every reception of communion of the Body and Blood of Christ was already desired by him in the Last Supper’ (n. 6).
The teaching of the Council of Trent cited above condemns the position of Martin Luther on faith and justification. Pope Francis has publicly expressed his agreement with the condemned positions of Luther. In an in-flight press conference on June 26th, 2016, Pope Francis stated:
Quote:I think that Martin Luther’s intentions were not mistaken; he was a reformer. Perhaps some of his methods were not right, although at that time, if you read Pastor’s history, for example – Pastor was a German Lutheran who experienced a conversion when he studied the facts of that period; he became a Catholic – we see that the Church was not exactly a model to emulate. There was corruption and worldliness in the Church; there was attachment to money and power. That was the basis of his protest. He was also intelligent, and he went ahead, justifying his reasons for it. Nowadays, Lutherans and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken.
On the day that Desiderio desideravi was issued, Pope Francis received in audience Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Nancy Pelosi has been publicly forbidden to receive communion under Canon 915 by her ordinary, Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone. The grounds for this measure were her consistent political support for the complete legalization of abortion up to birth. After the audience with Pope Francis, Nancy Pelosi received communion at a mass in St. Peter’s over which Pope Francis presided, causing scandal to Catholics over all the world. When asked about her illegal reception of communion, Pope Francis expressed no disapproval of it. Instead, he responded by saying ‘When the Church loses its pastoral nature, when a bishop loses his pastoral nature, it causes a political problem. That’s all I can say.’ This response rebukes Archbishop Cordileone for his justified application of Canon 915.
The Apostolic Letter Desiderio desideravi is not an infallible teaching, because it does not satisfy the necessary conditions for an exercise of papal infallibility. The canon of the Council of Trent is an exercise of the infallible teaching authority of the Church. Therefore, the contradiction between Desiderio desideravi and the defined doctrine of the Council of Trent does not falsify the claim of the Catholic Church to be infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit when by an exercise of her teaching office she requires all Catholics to believe a doctrine as being divinely revealed. On the possibility of a pope publicly teaching error, see the Correctio filialis addressed to Pope Francis by a number of Catholic scholars (https://www.correctiofilialis.org), and the discussions in the book Defending the Faith against Present Heresies (Arouca Press, 2021). No Catholic can believe or act upon a papal pronouncement if it contradicts the divinely revealed Catholic faith.
We, the undersigned, confess the Catholic faith concerning the worthy reception of the Eucharist as it is defined by the Council of Trent, according to which faith alone is not a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist. We encourage all the bishops and clerics of the Catholic Church to publicly confess the same doctrine about the worthy reception of the Eucharist, and enforce the related canons in order to avoid grave and public scandal.
[Signed.]
Please see here the list of first signatories. Scholars and clergymen are invited to contact us should they wish to sign this document: mhickson@lifesitenews.com
Signatories
Most Rev. Joseph Strickland, Bishop of Tyler
Most Rev. René Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi
Most Rev. Robert Mutsaerts, Auxiliary Bishop of S’Hertogenbosch in Netherlands
Most Rev. Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan
Fr. James Altman
Dr. Heinz-Lothar Barth, until 2016 professor of Latin and Greek at the University of Bonn
Donna F. Bethell, J.D.
James Bogle, Esq., MA TD VR, barrister-at-law and former President of Una Voce International
Deacon Philip Clingerman OCDS BS, BA, MA [Theology]
Deacon Nick Donnelly, MA
Anthony Esolen, PhD
Deacon Keith Fournier, JD, MTS, MPhil
Matt Gaspers, Managing Editor, Catholic Family News
Fr Stanislaw C. Gibziński, Reading, UK
Maria Guarini, STB, editor of the website Chiesa e postconcilio
Sarah Henderson, DCHS, MA (Religious Education and Catechetics), BA
Dr. Maike Hickson, PhD, journalist
Dr. Robert Hickson, retired professor of literature and philosophy
Dr. Rudolf Hilfer, Stuttgart, Germany
Dr. Rafael Huentelmann, Editor in Chief, METAPHYSICA
Steve Jalsevac, co-founder and president, LifeSiteNews.com
Dr. Peter A. Kwasniewski, PhD
Dr. John Lamont, DPhil
Fr. Elias Leyds, CSJ, diocese of Den Bosch, Netherlands
Fr. John P. Lovell
Dr. Cesar Felix Sanchez Martinez. Professor of Philosophy of Nature at the Saint Jerome Archdiocesan Seminary of Arequipa (Peru)
Deacon Eugene McGuirk
Martin Mosebach
Brian M. McCall, Editor in Chief, Catholic Family News
Patricia McKeever, B.Ed. M.Th., Editor, Catholic Truth (Scotland)
Julia Meloni, B.A. Yale, A.M. Harvard, author
Fr. Cor Mennen, lic. canon law, former seminary professor
Fr. Michael Menner
Dr. Sebastian Morello, BA, MA, PhD, essays editor for the The European Conservative
Fr. Gerald E. Murray, J.C.D., Pastor, Church of the Holy Family, New York, NY
George Neumayr, author
Fr. Guy Pagès
Paolo Pasqualucci, ret. professor of philosophy, University of Perugia, Italy
Dr. Claudio Pierantoni, Universidad de Chile, PhD History of Christianity, PhD Philosophy
Dr. Carlo Regazzoni, philosopher of culture
Dr. John Rist, emeritus professor of Classics and Philosophy, University of Toronto, FRSC
Eric Sammons, Editor, Crisis Magazine
Edward Schaefer, president, The Collegium
Wolfram Schrems, Mag. theol., Mag. phil.
Paul A. Scott PhD, FRSA, FRHistS, FCIL, CL, Associate Professor of French and Cramer Professor, Affiliate Faculty of the Gunn Center for the Study of Science Fiction, Affiliate Faculty of the Ad Astra Center for Science Fiction and Speculative Imagination, General Editor of The Year’s Work in Modern Language Studies (Brill) Department of French, Francophone and Italian Studies,
University of Kansas, USA
Anna Silvas, BA, MA, PhD, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, University of New England, Australia
Dr. Michael Sirilla, PhD
Anthony P. Stine, PhD
Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Netherlands
Dr. phil. habil. Berthold Wald, retired professor, Theological Faculty of Paderborn, Germany
John-Henry Westen, Co-Founder and Editor in Chief of LifeSiteNews.com
Elizabeth Yore, Esq., Founder, Yore Children
John Zmirak, PhD
|
|
|
|
| EU lawmakers support ban of agricultural goods linked to deforestation |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-15-2022, 10:52 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
The globalist Climate agenda marches forward...
EU lawmakers support ban of goods linked to deforestation
![[Image: FY5MSEBTNEI63IGWIFJJTP7L2U.jpg&w=767]](https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/FY5MSEBTNEI63IGWIFJJTP7L2U.jpg&w=767)
European lawmakers vote on climate change issues at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, eastern France, Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2022. European Union lawmakers have backed a proposal for a law that would ban the sale in the 27-nation bloc of agriculture products linked to the destruction of forests. (AP Photo/Jean-Francois Badias)
AP | September 13, 2022
BRUSSELS — European Union lawmakers have backed a proposal for a law that would ban the sale in the 27-nation bloc of agriculture products linked to the destruction of forests.
MEPs gathered on Tuesday in Strasbourg, France, supported and strengthened a plan from the EU’s executive arm with 453 votes to 57, and 123 abstentions.
We're following changes at the palace after the passing of Queen Elizabeth II. Get the Post Elizabeth newsletter for updates.
The EU Parliament will now start negotiations on the final text with EU member states.
Once approved, the law would force companies and producers to give assurances that products are “deforestation-free.” Businesses would be forced to verify that agricultural goods sold in the EU have not bee made on “deforested or degraded land anywhere in the world,” the Parliament said.
“Acknowledging that the EU is responsible for around 10% of global deforestation, we have no choice but to ramp up our efforts to halt global deforestation,” said Christophe Hansen, the lawmaker in charge of the Parliament’s report.
In addition, MEPs proposed that banks and financial institutions should be covered by the law to prevent them from investing in projects linked to deforestation.
“This could be the beginning of the end of the money pipeline that is destroying forests around the world – but only if national governments across the EU step up and support this plan to make European banks deforestation-free in negotiations on the final law,” said Giulia Bondi, from Global Witness campaigning group.
Deforestation in South America, Africa and Asia is driven mainly by agricultural expansion.
Quoting data from the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the EU Parliament said that some 420 million hectares of forest were lost to deforestation between 1990 and 2020. This is an area larger than the EU.
The European Commission, which proposes EU laws and supervises the way they are enacted, suggested last year that the legislation covered soy, cattle, palm oil, wood, cocoa and coffee.
Under the position adopted Tuesday, lawmakers also want to include pig meat, sheep and goats, poultry, maize and rubber, as well as charcoal and printed paper products.
“MEPs also want companies to verify that goods are produced in accordance with human rights provisions in international law and respect the rights of indigenous people,” the Parliament said.
Environmental group Greenpeace praised the result of the vote.
“Nobody wants to worry that their weekly shop might be linked to death and destruction – the vote today is a big step towards breaking that link,” said Greenpeace EU forest campaigner Sini Eräjää.
At the U.N.’s climate conference, COP26, last year, over 100 nations representing more than 85% of the world’s forests pledged to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030. Among them were several countries with massive forests, including Brazil, China, Colombia, Congo, Indonesia, Russia and the United States.
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis decries ‘proselytism and indoctrination’ at ‘ecumenical’ meeting in Kazakhstan |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-15-2022, 10:28 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis decries ‘proselytism and indoctrination’ at ‘ecumenical’ meeting in Kazakhstan
The Pope's speech appeared to contradict Catholic Church teaching on a number of issues, notably on the promotion of non-Catholic religions.
![[Image: Pope-francis-imam-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Pope-francis-imam-810x500.jpg)
Pope Francis greeting the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed el-Tayeb, September 14, 2022.
Instagram screenshot
Sep 14, 2022
NUR-SULTAN, Kazakhstan (LifeSiteNews) – In an address to the interreligious meeting Pope Francis is currently attending in Kazakhstan, he defended religious plurality and decried “proselytism and indoctrination.” While the Pontiff quoted extensively from a non-Christian philosopher during his speech, he did not reference the Bible or the Catholic faith at all.
Pope Francis delivered his address on September 14 as part of the opening session of the 7th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions held in Kazakhstan.
A number of religious leaders were present, including (among many Muslim leaders) the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, Ahmed el-Tayeb; Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel Yitzhak Yosef; and Buddhist, Shintoist, Taoist, and political leaders.
Addressing the Congress participants, Francis ignored the numerous religious differences of the various representatives and stated that their “religions” remind them that they are “journeying towards the same heavenly goal.” “Our shared nature as creatures thus gives rise to a common bond, an authentic fraternity,” he said.
Everyone has ‘right’ to promote his own religion
Employing language and themes of “religious freedom” that have predominated since the Second Vatican Council, Francis declared that such “freedom” was “an essential condition for genuinely human and integral development.”
He also employed numerous quotations from Kazakhstani philosopher Abai Kunanbaev – born into a Muslim family during the 1800s – to defend his concept of “religious freedom.”
“Religious freedom is a basic, primary and inalienable right needing to be promoted everywhere, one that may not be restricted merely to freedom of worship,” Francis said. “Each person has the right to render public testimony to his or her own creed, proposing it without ever imposing it.”
He added that such a form of religious “preaching” was the “correct method,” while claiming people are “called to step back” from “proselytism and indoctrination.”
A “society marked by the respectful coexistence of religious, ethnic and cultural differences is the best way to enhance the distinctive features of each, to bring people together while respecting their diversity, and to promote their loftiest aspirations without compromising their vitality,” he said.
Francis did not mention Jesus Christ by name at all, and predominantly used more ecumenically acceptable synonyms for God, such as “Almighty, Creator, the Divine.”
The Pope closed his address by appearing to argue that the plurality of religions celebrated at the Congress was willed by God. He called on the assembled delegates to “ … firmly maintain our own identities, open to the courage of otherness and to fraternal encounter. Only in this way, along this path, in these dark times in which we live, will we be able to radiate the light of our Creator.”
Francis opposing former Papal teaching
Yet, Francis’ words come in contradiction to those of his predecessors in the Papal Throne. As noted by Catholic Family News managing editor Matt Gaspers, Pope Leo XIII condemned the theme proposed by Francis in his 1888 encyclical Libertas.
Referring to the Church’s relation with other religions, Leo wrote that the Church “does not forbid public authority to tolerate what is at variance with truth and justice, for the sake of avoiding some greater evil, or of obtaining or preserving some greater good.”
The Catholic Church tolerates “certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves,” Leo wrote, “but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind.”
Notably, while Francis liberally promoted the plurality of many religions at the Congress, Leo wrote against such a stance: “one thing, however, remains always true — that the liberty which is claimed for all to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.”
While the primacy of the Catholic faith was completely ignored in the address, Pope Francis did propose some of his regular talking points, including ecological actions, his much promoted form of “fraternity,” and the promotion of world peace.
Rejection of Just War teaching
In his promotion of global peace, he also appeared to reject the Church’s teaching on just war. God “guides us always in the way of peace, never that of war,” the Pope said. He continued by referencing what he called “the only means blessed by heaven and worthy of man” for resolving conflicts – namely, “encounter, dialogue and patient negotiations, which make progress especially when they take into consideration the young and future generations.”
However, throughout the centuries, the Church has laid out conditions under which waging a war is in fact acceptable. Drawing from Scripture and the Fathers of the Church, St. Thomas Aquinas proposed three factors to be met for a war to be just:
- It must be declared by a legitimate authority.
- It must be for a just cause
- It must be fought with a just intent
The Pope also made a moderate defense of the unborn, decrying the “throwaway culture” by which “each day children, born and unborn, migrants and elderly persons, are cast aside, discarded.”
“Many of our brothers and sisters die sacrificed on the altar of profit, amid clouds of the sacrilegious incense of indifference. Yet every human being is sacred,” he said.
|
|
|
|
| Abp. Viganò: ‘Authoritarian tyrant’ Pope Francis causing ‘incalculable’ damage in the Church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-15-2022, 09:27 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Abp. Viganò: ‘Authoritarian tyrant’ Pope Francis causing ‘incalculable’ damage in the Church
'It seems obvious to me that the assessment of the intellectual dishonesty of the proponents of the recent restrictions on liturgical matters – all of whom are emissaries of Bergoglio – is inexorably negative.'
![[Image: ARCH._CARLO_MARIA_VIGANO-810x500-1-810x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ARCH._CARLO_MARIA_VIGANO-810x500-1-810x500.jpeg)
Sep 14, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – Editor’s note: Below follows the transcript of an interview between Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò and Paix Liturgique during a conference held by the Civitas movement on August 13. The interview has been translated from Italian.
Paix Liturgique (PL): Your Excellency, why, after Vatican II, is the question of the liturgy such a burning question?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: The liturgical question is of great importance because the sacred action of the Mass contains the doctrine, morality, spirituality, and discipline of the ecclesial body that celebrates the liturgy. Thus, just as the Catholic Mass is a perfect and coherent expression of the Catholic Magisterium, the reformed liturgy [the Novus Ordo] is an expression of conciliar deviations; indeed, it reveals and confirms its heterodox essence without the ambiguities and verbiage of the Second Vatican Council texts.
We could say, to use a simile, that the healthy blood of the Gospel flows in the veins of the Tridentine Mass, while the new rite flows with the infected blood of heresy and the spirit of the world.
PL: Does Pope Francis, who is not deeply interested in the liturgy, not at least have the merit of raising the real problem when he says that the two liturgical forms, the old and the new, reflect two different ecclesiologies?
Abp. Viganò: This is exactly what I have just said, and it is exactly what (in 1968) Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci denounced in their “breve esame critico” (brief critical examination), and also Archbishop Lefebvre in his many interventions, and has also been denounced by other bishops and liturgists. What you called the “two liturgical forms” of a single rite are actually two different rites, one fully Catholic and one that is silent about Catholic truths and insinuates errors of a Protestant and modernist foundation. In this Bergoglio is perfectly right: whoever embraces Vatican II and its heretical developments cannot find those errors expressed in the traditional liturgy, which, due to its clarity in the profession of the Faith, represents a condemnation and a negation of the mens [the mindset or outlook] of those who conceived the Novus Ordo.
PL: Several documents of the offensive against the Traditional rite have followed one after another in the past year, beginning with Traditionis custodes (July 16, 2021), then the “Responsa ad Dubia” (issued December 4, 2021, by then-Archbishop Arthur Roche, prefect of the CDW), and then the Apostolic Letter Desiderio desideravi (June 29, 2022). Can we still have hope that the attempted offensive has failed and that the ancient liturgy will not die?
Abp. Viganò: The first deception we must not fall into is being deceived by the subversive use of acts of government and the Magisterium. In this case, we have documents that have not been promulgated in order to confirm our brothers in the faith, but rather in order to distance them from it, in clear contradiction to Pope Benedict XVI ‘s Motu Proprio Summorum pontificum, which instead recognized full rights to the Tridentine liturgy.
Secondly, the intemperance of an authoritarian tyrant, consumed by hatred for the Church of Christ, is opening the eyes of even the most moderate, showing them that the whole conciliar fraud is based on aversion to the truths expressed by the Tridentine Mass, while the official narrative claims that the liturgical reform was only meant to make these truths more accessible to the faithful by translating them.
PL: The way in which Traditionis custodes is applied varies considerably from country to country and from bishop to bishop. Some have approved the Pope’s document, but in reality they have not changed anything in their dioceses. Is there no feeling, especially in Italy, that whoever will succeed Francis will not be able to maintain this repressive line?
Abp. Viganò: The Church is not a society governed by an absolute monarch, free from any higher authority, who can impose his whim on his subjects. The head of the Church is Christ, and Christ is its only true King and Lord, of whom the Roman Pontiff is the vicar, just as he is the successor of the Prince of the Apostles.
Abusing the vicarious power of Christ and placing oneself outside the succession by proposing heterodox doctrines, or by imposing norms that refer to them, makes this intrinsic link with Christ the Head and with His Mystical Body, the Church, disappear. In fact, the Pope’s vicarious power enjoys all the prerogatives of absolute, immediate, and direct authority over the Church only to the extent that it conforms to its main purpose, which is the salus animarum, always following in the wake of Tradition and fidelity to Our Lord.
Furthermore, in the exercise of this authority, the Pope enjoys the special graces of state always within the very specific boundaries of this purpose; these graces have no effect where he acts against Christ and the Church. This is why Bergoglio’s furious attempts, however violent and destructive, are inexorably destined to break, and one day will certainly be declared null and void.
PL: What do you recommend to laypeople who are upset by this situation?
Abp. Viganò: The laity are living members of the Mystical Body, and as such they have the native right to demand that its visible authority act and legislate in conformity with the mandate it has received from Christ. When this earthly authority, by the permission of providence, acts and legislates against the will of Christ, the faithful must first understand that this test is a means permitted by providence in order to open their eyes after decades of deviations and hypocrisy by which they have been overwhelmed, and to which many have adhered in good faith – precisely because they are obedient to the hierarchy and unaware of the fraud perpetrated against them.
When they understand this, they will notice the treasure they have been robbed of by those who should have kept it and handed it over to future generations, instead of hiding it after devaluing it in order to replace it with a bad counterfeit. At that point, they will implore the majesty of God to shorten the time of the trial and grant the Church a supreme shepherd who obeys Christ, who belongs to Him, who loves Him, and who renders Him perfect worship.
PL: Diocesan priests seem to be the targets and main victims of the Pope’s measures against the traditional liturgy: what advice would you give them?
Abp. Viganò: In the decades preceding the Second Vatican Council, the leaders of the Church were well aware of the growing threat represented by the sedition of the modernist infiltrators. Because of this, Pius XII had to centralize power, but his decision – however understandable – had the consequence of instilling in the clergy the idea that the authority in the Church is indisputable regardless of what it may order, while doctrine teaches us that the uncritical acceptance of any order is servility, not true obedience.
Strengthened by this approach which the bishops and priests felt at the time of Vatican II, whoever carried out the coup made use of this obedience to impose what would never have been conceivable until then. At the same time, the post-conciliar work of indoctrination and the merciless purge of the few dissenters aided this end.
Today’s situation allows us to look at the post-conciliar events with greater objectivity, also because the results of the “conciliar spring” are now there for all to see, from the crisis of both diocesan and religious vocations to the collapse of attendance at the Sacraments by the faithful. The liberalization of the availability of the ancient Mass by Benedict XVI has made many priests discover the priceless treasures of the true liturgy who were previously completely unaware of them, and who in that Mass have rediscovered the sacrificial dimension of their priesthood, which makes the celebrant alter Christus, transforming him intimately. Those who have experienced this “miracle” of grace are no longer willing to give it up. This is why I invite all my brother priests to celebrate the Mass of St. Pius V and to let Christ – Priest and Victim – act in their priestly souls and give a solid, supernatural meaning to their ministry.
My advice to these priests is to resist and show firmness in the face of a series of abuses that have been going on for too long now. It would help them understand that it is not possible to put the Apostolic Mass [Tridentine Mass] on the same level as the one invented by Archbishop Annibale Bugnini [Novus Ordo Missae], because in the first the truth is affirmed unequivocally in order to give glory to God and save souls, while in the second the truth is fraudulently silenced and often denied in order to please the spirit of the world and leave souls in error and sin.
Having understood this, the choice between the two rites does not even arise, since reason and faith animated by charity show us which of them conforms to God’s will and which is not in accord with it. A soul in love with the Lord does not tolerate compromises, and is willing to give his life to remain faithful to the Church.
PL: Some think we should take advantage of this crisis to ask a future pope not to return to Summorum pontificum, but instead to give full freedom to the traditional liturgy? Is this possible?
Abp. Viganò: The traditional liturgy already enjoys de iure full freedom and full rights by virtue of its venerable antiquity, the bull Quo Primum of St. Pius V, and its ratification by the ecclesial body for two thousand years. The fact that this freedom is not exercised is due to the “prudence” of the ministers of God, who have shown themselves uncritically obedient to any decision of the authority of the Church by the sin of servility, rather than obedience to God who is the origin and ultimate end of that authority.
Full freedom for the traditional liturgy will certainly be restored de facto as well, but together with this restoration it will be necessary to abolish the new rite, which has amply proved itself as the origin of the doctrinal, moral, and liturgical dissolution of the people of God. The time will come when the misunderstandings and errors of the Second Vatican Council will be condemned, and with them, their cultic expression.
PL: What do you think is the main flaw of the new Mass?
Abp. Viganò: I believe that there are three critical issues that must be mentioned, attributable to the single problem of understanding the Catholic liturgy.
The first defect of the new rite is that it was drawn up with the cynical coldness of a bureaucrat, while the authentic liturgy is a harmonious corpus that has developed organically over the centuries, adapting its immune system – so to speak – in order to fight the viruses of every age. Believing that one is able to “restore original simplicity” to an adult body, forcing it to return to childhood, is an unnatural operation, revealing the willful intention of those who traveled this path with the sole intent of making the Church more vulnerable to the assaults of the enemy. And whoever plotted this fraud knew very well that he could only convey his errors by eliminating that Mass which alone condemns them and disavows them at every gesture, every ceremony, and every word. There is no good intention in whoever gave birth to this liturgical monstrum, designed to act as a sort of tent or canvas under which to give free rein to the most aberrant and sacrilegious deviations.
The second flaw is represented by the deception with which the Novus Ordo was presented and imposed on the Church, alleging that it was a simple translation of the ancient rite. In Sacrosanctum Concilium, the council fathers authorized the translation into the vernacular of the readings and didactic parts of the Mass, prescribing that the Roman Canon be left intact, said in Latin, and spoken in a whisper. What has been prepared for us by the Consilium ad exsequendam is something else, a rite that seems to have been slavishly copied from Cranmer’s “Book of Common Prayer” of 1549 and which corresponds perfectly to the ideological approach of its writers.
The third flaw is the deliberate substitution of the main object of worship – the Holy Trinity – who has been replaced by the assembly gathered together with the celebrant, which is now the fulcrum around which the whole liturgy revolves, the point of reference for the sacred action. The vision of the priest as “president of the assembly,” the loss of sacredness in order to encourage improvisation, the replacement of the sacrificial altar with a convivial table – these are all consequences of a doctrinal error that denies the essence of the Mass, in which Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is offered in a bloodless form to the Father.
A rite born of lies and fraud, conceived by a modernist freemason, imposed by force through the abolition of a two-thousand-year-old rite, does not even deserve to be analyzed in all its specific points: it must simply be canceled.
PL: Why is the Pope so hostile to the American episcopate?
Abp. Viganò: More than just to the American episcopate, Bergoglio is particularly hostile to the faithful of the United States. This finds its reason in the mentality of this nation, which is essentially liberal but in which – precisely because of the coexistence of different and heterogeneous religions and cultures – a voice is also given to conservatives and traditionalists, who in fact constitute a numerically important component that is fervent and committed. Parishes, movements, and traditional American groups show how much the Tridentine liturgy and integral Catholic doctrine are the object of a rediscovery and great appreciation by the faithful, while the churches in which the Montinian rite is celebrated are inexorably losing congregants, vocations and – something not to be underestimated – they are also losing financial support.
The simple possibility that one can “with impunity” go to the Tridentine Mass without any social stigma is for Bergoglio unheard of and unacceptable, because the evidence of the success of the so-called “traditional option” undermines decades of proclamations and self-incensing on the part of progressives.
To see thousands of faithful, young people, families with children, gathered at the ancient Mass and living their Baptism coherently – while on the other hand the financial and sexual scandals of the clergy and self-styled Catholic politicians empty the churches and lose credibility in civil society – constitutes that annoying “control group” which in the medical field demonstrates the ineffectiveness of a treatment precisely because those who have not been subjected to it enjoy health. Just as the vaccination of an experimental gene serum must be imposed on everyone so that people will not see that the adverse effects and deaths affect only the vaccinated, so also, in the liturgical context, there must be no group or community that shows the failure of that mass inoculation with modernism that was Vatican II.
The welcome and warm openness of some American bishops towards the traditional communities and their interventions seeking the moral consistency of Catholics engaged in politics sends Bergoglio into a rage, leading him to impulsive behavior and intemperate reactions that reveal his bad faith and the total deceptiveness of his appeals to parresia (“bold truth-telling”), to mercy, to inclusivity.
On the other hand, after decades of ecumenical appeals to “seek what unites rather than what divides” and to “build bridges, not walls,” it seems to me that the accusations of the newly-created Cardinal Roche – who was just awarded the red hat due to his loyalty to the Pope – accusations in which Roche defined traditional Catholics as “Protestants,” reveal a fundamental hypocrisy, because while Catholic churches are now open to Protestants – they are granted communicatio in sacris [Holy Communion] even in the presence of prelates and cardinals, while traditional Catholics are now treated by modernists as excommunicated vitandi – people to be avoided.
It seems obvious to me that the assessment of the intellectual dishonesty of the proponents of the recent restrictions on liturgical matters – all of whom are emissaries of Bergoglio – is inexorably negative, even if only starting from the human aspect, so to speak: they are not sincere people, nor willing to understand the reasoning of their interlocutors. They demonstrate a ruthless authoritarianism, a pharisaic formalism, and an inclination to dissimulation and lies that cannot be the premise for any equitable solution.
PL: Washington, Chicago, Arlington, Savannah: why have the bishops of these four American dioceses declared war on the traditional Mass?
Abp. Viganò: These dioceses – certainly Washington and Chicago, without omitting San Diego and Newark – are run by bishops who are part of Bergoglio’s magic circle and McCarrick ‘s “lavender mafia.” Their relations of mutual complicity, their action to cover up scandals, their relations with the deep state and with the Democratic Party, find their significant encapsulation in the esteem they enjoy on the part of Bergoglio, who promotes them and ratifies their declarations and their disastrous government actions.
PL: Behind all these apparently disjointed decisions (the Pachamama, the war against lace and traditional liturgy, the retreat on moral issues, etc.) do you see the implementation of a precise and coherent strategy or plan?
Abp. Viganò: It is evident that this relentless action of war against traditional Catholics includes a strategy and a tactic, and that it corresponds to a plan devised for decades to destroy the Church of Christ and replace it with its ecumenical, globalist, and apostate counterfeit. It would be foolish to think that they act without a purpose and without organizing themselves.
Bergoglio’s election in the conclave of 2013 was also planned: let’s not forget the emails between John Podesta and Hillary Clinton about the need to promote a “springtime of the Church” in which a progressive pope modifies its doctrine and morals by enslaving them to New World Order ideology.
Action against Benedict XVI was planned to push him to resign. The subversive work of the innovators at the Council was planned. The action of progressives loyal to Bergoglio was planned in the synods, in the meetings of the curial dicasteries, in the consistories. On the other hand, behind the enemies of Christ and the Church, Satan always hides with his plots, his deceptions, his lies.
PL: How do you see the future of the Church?
Abp. Viganò: I believe that, in the short term, the Church will have to deal with the disasters caused by Bergoglio and his little circle of corrupt associates. The damages of this “pontificate” are incalculable, and are now understood even by simple people, to whom the sensus fidei makes evident the absolute incompatibility of the current hierarchy with the ecclesial body. The tension and opposition that we see in the civil sphere between the political class and citizens is a mirror image of the increasingly profound one between ecclesiastical authorities and the faithful.
In the long term, however, I believe that the Church will find precisely from this profound crisis of Faith a spur to renew itself and purify itself, definitively abandoning that intrinsically liberal attitude that has so far brought together God and Mammon, Christ and Belial, St. Pius V and Bergoglio. We saw the deformed and gruesome face of the enemy, who could infiltrate as far as the sancta sanctorum relying on the willingness to compromise, on the mediocrity of the clerics, on human respect and on the timidity of the hierarchy. We have before our eyes the holiness and humility of so many good priests, religious and faithful, who are awakening from their slumber and understand the epochal battle in progress.
At the same time we see the corruption, dishonesty, immorality, and rebellion against God of those who present themselves as the true custodians of Christ’s authority, who instead usurp that authority with cunning and exercise it with violence.
Even a child understands which side to stand on, who to listen to, and who to distance himself from. This is why the words of Our Lord are as valid today as ever: “Unless you be converted and become like little children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven (Mt 18: 3).”
|
|
|
|
| Biden’s Executive Order Designed to Release Transhumanist Hell on America? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-14-2022, 06:13 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Leo Hohmann: Biden’s Executive Order Designed to Release Transhumanist Hell on America
![[Image: biden-doctor-dna.jpg]](https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/biden-doctor-dna.jpg)
GP | September 13, 2022
If anyone needed proof that the powers pushing the levers behind the mindless moron who sits in the Oval Office are fully on board with the World Economic Forum/United Nations agenda of biomedical tyranny and transhumanism, look no further than the executive order that Joe Biden signed on Monday, September 12.
By quietly getting Biden’s signature on this document, his handlers may have given us the most ominous sign yet that we stand on the threshold of a technocratic one-world beast system. Prepare to make your stand because it’s about to get much more intense.
This document’s Orwellian title, Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy, will assure that its significance will fly right over the heads of 99 percent of the media, even the conservative media.
They will read it and yawn. I plead with everyone reading this article to please not make that same mistake.
Because of the arcane scientific language in which this document is written, even most of those who take the time to read and study it (I assure you Biden did not) will not fully grasp what is being ordered by the White House.
That’s where we strive to help.
Karen Kingston, a former Pfizer employee and current analyst for the pharmaceutical and medical-device industries, helps us decipher what’s going on in this executive order.
Kingston stated in a Twitter post:
Quote:“Let me read between the lines for the America. Biden’s Sept. 12, 2022, executive order declares that Americans must surrender all human rights that stand in the way of transhumanism. Clinical trial safety standards and informed consent will be eradicated as they stand in the way of universally unleashing gene-editing technologies needed to merge humans with A.I. In order to achieve the societal goals of the New World Order, crimes against humanity are not only legal, but mandatory.”
We’re ?’ed.https://t.co/qjuf8MUXIO pic.twitter.com/3irdwjuEnx
— NEWSNANCY (@NewsNancy9) September 13, 2022
Patrick Wood, an economist and author of several books on technocracy, has been following the transhumanist and global technocracy movements for four decades. He told me that Kingston is not overstating the issue.
He said this E.O. is proof that the executive branch is now owned lock, stock and barrel by the biomedical/pharmaceutical industry. It will be Katy bar the door from here on out.
“The transhumanists within Big Pharma have completely taken over government policy and taxpayer funds to promote their own anti-human agenda of hacking the software of life,” Wood told me. “It also clearly demonstrates who has the power, and who sets the policies in America.”
The mRNA injections that have already gone into the bodies of at least 70 percent of adults in the U.S. mark the gateway to transhumanism. We have been told this by Kingston as well as by the late Dr. Zev Zelenko and Dr. Robert Malone, a co-inventor of the mRNA platform.
LeoHohmann.com was one of the first sites to blow the whistle on Moderna’s former chief medical officer, Tal Zaks, who told the world straight up in December 2017 that “We have hacked the software of life,” and that this mRNA gene-editing biotechnology would be incorporated into vaccines to treat and prevent all manner of illnesses. We’ve seen how well they work, with millions getting sick and even dying after getting two or more doses of the Covid injections offered up by Moderna and Pfizer. With the FDA and CDC now totally on board, this mRNA technology is being included in scores of other vaccines, including flu shots.
The September 12 executive order was no doubt put in place as back up for the continued experimentation on the human population, and I expect the vaccine industry will exploit it to the max. Soon we will see the return of vax mandates, this time more ferociously policed and enforced than before.
This E.O. may also have been timed at least partly in anticipation of the new pandemic treaty that the Biden administration is hoping to get passed through the United Nations World Health Organization next year. This treaty will transfer sovereignty over matters of “health emergencies” from the national level to the WHO.
Wood said the E.O.’s intended consequences is to push the frontier of genetic modification of all living things and especially humans. He believes this will ultimately spark the biggest public backlash in modern history.
“Biden pledges not only funding but an all-of-government transformation to support this anti-human scheme from top to bottom,” Wood writes. “It also automatically blocks any agency or department from dissent.”
Below are just a few of the highlights quoted directly from the document:
- The term “biotechnology” means technology that applies to or is enabled by life sciences innovation or product development.
- The term “biomanufacturing” means the use of biological systems to develop products, tools, and processes at commercial scale.
- The term “bioeconomy” means economic activity derived from the life sciences, particularly in the areas of biotechnology and biomanufacturing, and includes industries, products, services, and the workforce.
- The term “biological data” means the information, including associated descriptors, derived from the structure, function, or process of a biological system(s) that is measured, collected, or aggregated for analysis.
- The term “key R&D areas” includes fundamental R&D of emerging biotechnologies, including engineering biology; predictive engineering of complex biological systems, including the designing, building, testing, and modeling of entire living cells, cell components, or cellular systems; quantitative and theory-driven multi-disciplinary research to maximize convergence with other enabling technologies; and regulatory science, including the development of new information, criteria, tools, models, and approaches to inform and assist regulatory decision-making. These R&D priorities should be coupled with advances in predictive modeling, data analytics, artificial intelligence, bioinformatics, high-performance and other advanced computing systems, metrology and data-driven standards, and other non-life science enabling technologies.
- The term “life sciences” means all sciences that study or use living organisms, viruses, or their products, including all disciplines of biology and all applications of the biological sciences (including biotechnology, genomics, proteomics, bioinformatics, and pharmaceutical and biomedical research and techniques), but excluding scientific studies associated with radioactive materials or toxic chemicals that are not of biological origin or synthetic analogues of toxins.
What this means is that human beings will be data mined for their most personal possession, their DNA and genomic properties, and the government will offer no protection.
It will actually be encouraged and seen as a green light for biomedical practitioners worldwide. It is the goal of the technocratic proprietors of Agenda 2030 to catalogue, map out, and monitor every living thing on earth.
This was spelled out in the early 2000s by the late researcher Rosa Koire and put into book form in 2011 with “Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21.” Koire was a Democrat, but she understood that the takedown of America and indeed every nation of the formerly free world, would not be accomplished by the left or the right but by supranational globalists with an allegiance to no nation. In fact, these globalists detest the nation-state model that has dominated the world for thousands of years. Their goal is a “global governance” and they say it out loud in their own documents.
Have no fear.
Do not be intimidated.
|
|
|
|
| New Zealand Scraps Nearly All COVID-19 Restrictions, Including Mask And Vaccination Mandates |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-13-2022, 05:53 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
New Zealand Scraps Nearly All COVID-19 Restrictions, Including Mask And Vaccination Mandates
![[Image: GettyImages-1214607310-700x420.jpg?itok=Q9EWq_Hl]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/GettyImages-1214607310-700x420.jpg?itok=Q9EWq_Hl)
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern speaks to media at a press conference ahead of a nationwide lockdown at Parliament in Wellington, New Zealand, on March 25, 2020. (Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
ZH |SEP 12, 2022
Authored by Rebecca Zhu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours)
New Zealand will be retiring its COVID-19 traffic light system and significantly scaling down COVID restrictions from Sept. 13 so Kiwis could “move forward with certainty,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced.
“It’s time to safely turn the page on our COVID-19 management and live without the extraordinary measures we have previously used,” Ardern said, calling it a “milestone.”
With the abolition of the traffic light COVID protection framework, mask mandates will be lifted in all areas except in healthcare and aged care settings.
Household contacts will no longer need to isolate, while people tested positive to COVID-19 will continue to be required to isolate for seven days.
All government vaccine mandates will end on Sept. 26, and all vaccination requirements for incoming travellers and aircrew will also be removed.
After restrictions are lifted, it will be up to the employer’s discretion whether they will require workers to wear masks or get vaccinated for COVID-19.
“In short, we now move on to a simple two requirements system of masks in healthcare settings and seven days isolation for positive cases only,” Ardern said.
The COVID-19 protection framework, or traffic light system, set out the rules for different traffic light settings, where red was the highest alert setting, and green meant no restrictions. At the time of removal, New Zealand was at orange.
The government also confirmed that COVID leave payments will continue.
COVID-19 Minister Ayesha Verrall also announced the purchase of an additional 40,000 anti-viral medicine courses, expected to arrive in New Zealand within days.
“So now, anyone over the age of 65, and Maori and Pacific people over the age of 50, or anyone who meets Pharmac requirements, can access the treatment in the early stages of contracting the virus.
“This means more than double the number of New Zealanders will be able to access these medicines if they need them than previously,” Verrall said.
Decision Welcomed Across the Board
Retail NZ welcomed the move to return New Zealand to a “sense of normality.”
“After over two years of being at the forefront of COVID-19 rules, alert level changes, low foot traffic, and nonsensical mask rules, retailers across New Zealand will be pleased with today’s revised approach,” Retail NZ Chief Executive Greg Harford said.
“The revision today largely brings New Zealand in line with most of the rest of the world.”
But Harford encouraged the government to further revise the isolation period down to between three to five days.
ACT party agreed with the idea, with ACT Leader David Seymour noting that New Zealand had among the strictest isolation rules in the world.
“Keeping people locked in their houses longer than is necessary imposes real costs to them and the economy without improving our COVID-19 response,” he said.
“New Zealand is holding on to a long COVID hangover. It turns out an ‘abundance of caution’ is an abundance of cost for New Zealanders.”
|
|
|
|
| Our Lady of Bethlehem |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-13-2022, 05:21 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- Replies (5)
|
|
Our Lady of Bethlehem - Part I
Her Roots & Her Adventure in America
Taken from here [slightly adapted].
![[Image: B_020_Conquistadora.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_020_Conquistadora.jpg)
Nuestra Señora de Belén San Carlos Borromeo Mission
Recently, this interesting letter came from a reader in California:
Quote:Is the statue of Our Lady of Bethlehem in the Carmel Mission connected to the devotion of Our Lady of Good Success? I read on your site that the original statue of Our Lady of Good Success was in Spain and that the devotion to that image spread quickly throughout Europe. I ask because the two statues look so similar.
As you probably know, the statue of Our Lady of Bethlehem was brought to Carmel by Fr. Serra to stop the Russian invasion that was threatening the Pacific Coast. Do you have any more information on that historic statue? It is difficult to find anything on this topic.
All the best to you and thank you for your wonderful site!
Sincerely,
D.L.
✠ ✠ ✠
The story of the beautiful statue of Nuestra Señora de Belén [Our Lady of Bethlehem] is one of the buried histories of our Catholic past. Like the Missions themselves that were abandoned and left to decay and then fortunately restored in the 19th century, historic facts like those related to this devotion should be resurrected and given a place of prominence in Catholic textbooks. It is to encourage this initiative that I write this article.
First let us look at the Portuguese roots of this devotion, and then follow Our Lady of Bethlehem’s journey to the Mission of Carmel in Upper California.
Portuguese Roots
The title Our Lady of Bethlehem honors Our Lady at the birth of Christ. The Marian calendar celebrates the feast the Virgin of Bethlehem at Christmas, the Nativity of Our Lord. This devotion became popular in the 15th century in Portugal and Spain during the Age of Discovery because of the Portuguese Chapel to the Virgin of Belén, or Virgin of Restelo, in the Belem Tower close to Lisbon, the point of departure for ships seeking the route to India.
![[Image: B_020_Torre.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_020_Torre.jpg)
Virgin Belem, Belen Tower, Lisbon - A copy of the Chapel's statue was placed outside Belen Tower
In the Tower a small chapel was built by the Infante Don Henry the Navigator and dedicated to Our Lady of Bethlehem. The sailors would go to pray before the stone statue of Our Lady seated on a throne and holding the Christ Child on her lap before every voyage, asking her protection. On their return home, they would come back to thank her for saving them from harm. She was also invoked as Virgin of the Star, (Virgem da Estrela) as the Star of the East who guided the Magi to Christ, Our Lady of Help (Nossa Senhora da Ajuda), who gave her constant succor to the sailors at sea, and Our Lady of Good Success, because the sailors invoked her for successful voyages.
It also became a custom for captains of the ship to spend the night in prayer in her chapel before the day their ship departed. Vasco de Gama and all his men made their vigil at the shrine of Our Lady of Bethlehem before his successful voyage to the Indies in 1497. On his return a year later, his first visit was to Our Lady of Bethlehem to thank her for the good success. On March 8, 1500, the Portuguese explorer Pedro Alvares Cabral knelt before the statue of Our Lady of Bethlehem. She rewarded his journey with the discovery of Brazil.
In 1495 the chapel was given to the Order of St. Jerome and, in thanksgiving for the discovery of the Indies, King Don Manuel built a monumental church, the Monastery of Santa Maria de Belém. The statue was transferred to it, and the navigators and sailors continued to visit Our Lady of Bethlehem there before and after every voyage.
It was only natural that the devotion should spread throughout the New World. The Franciscans, always dedicated to the Nativity, accompanied the discoverers and were eager to honor Our Lady under this beautiful title. Churches, seminaries, schools and cities in Brazil and New Spain were named after her. Even in our country, we find the city of Belén, New Mexico, originally called Nuestra Señora de Belén when it was founded by a royal grant in 1741.
The oldest statue on the West Coast is the life-sized Our Lady of Bethlehem at Mission San Carlos Borromeo. How she came to reign at the Carmel Mission is part of the adventure of establishing the first missions in Upper California. Here is her story.
Why Spain found the California Missions
For a century and a half, Franciscan friars had been pleading with the Spanish Crown to send missionaries to the realm of California. Charles III wanted to do this, but funds were always short and there were more pressing affairs. In 1768, Spain’s furthest post north on the Pacific Coast was Santa Maria Mission, 300 miles south of the present Mexican-U.S. border.
Then the Schismatic Russian Empire began to growl and threaten. Rumors were spreading that Catherine the Great had decided to occupy Monterey, discovered by 1603 by Sebastian Vizcaíno and claimed for the Spain but never colonized. Faced with this threat, the King commissioned a remarkable man, Don José de Galvez, General Visitor of New Spain, to send an expedition to Upper California and secure Spain’s hold on that large 500-mile coastal stretch extending from the port of San Diego (33rd parallel) to the port of Monterey (37th parallel).
![[Image: B_020_Galvez.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_020_Galvez.jpg)
José de Galvez, Visitor General of New Spain. Below, an authentic portrait of Junipero Serra, drawn in 1773
![[Image: B_020_Serra.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/B_020_Serra.jpg)
From his headquarters in Santa Ana in Mexico, Galvez, a brilliant organizer, stern disciplinarian and pious Catholic, had the insight to summon another remarkable man who ultimately secured the success of the plan. That man was the Franciscan Friar Junipero Serra, a small man, 5'2", 56 years of age, and plagued by a chronic leg infection. This unlikely pair – the tall, rigorous military man and miniscule limping friar – have been called the last great conquistadores in the annals of Spain.
In the person of the General Visitor, Fr. Serra found a worthy collaborator; both had rigid determination and a genius for planning and adjustment. From their headquarters in Santa Ana in Baja California, they spent two months preparing for the journey, which they named the Sacred Expedition. The plan of Galvez was to establish garrisons at San Diego and Monterey. Fr. Serra would plant 10 missions under military protection, one every 50 miles, to convert and civilize the natives, starting with the ones at San Diego and Monterey.
Galvez was well aware that to conquer that hinterland, he needed the missionaries to convert the natives so that a new Catholic kingdom – a region half as large as Spain – would take root in the soil. For such an adventure, he also counted on the help of Heaven. At this point in our story, the statue of Nuestra Señora de Belén enters the picture.
In 1769, the Archbishop of Mexico City, Antonio de Lorenzana y Butrón, gave the 5’2” statue of Our Lady of Bethlehem to General Galvez to accompany that first expedition to Alta California.(1) Galvez entrusted this treasure to Fr. Serra, exacting from the friar the promise that she would be returned to him in Mexico City after the cross was planted in Monterey. From the start, she bore a double title, Our Lady of Bethlehem and also La Conquistadora, as the conqueror of the souls of the Indians of Upper California.
Two expeditions were planned, one by sea commanded by Don Gaspar de Portolá, governor of the Peninsula of California, and another by land, to which Fr. Serra attached himself, despite one of his legs being badly ulcerated. Galvez placed the expedition under the patronage of St. Joseph, promising to have a Mass sung in his honor on the 19th of every month in all the future missions. Into the helm of the San Antonio, one of three ships to depart for San Diego Bay, the bells, altars, and liturgical equipment for the future church missions were packed. Here also is where Nuestra Señora de Belén began her voyage.
On January 6, Fr. Serra blessed the ship and flags, sang Mass and all the crew and passengers received Communion. Galvez had already ordered that every seaman and soldier should make his confession. On January 9, 1769 the first ship departed. Galvez wrote that his heart had gone with the expedition even though he could not. (2)
Galvez was being called mad for embarking on such great undertaking with such slight means. At the bottom of one of his numerous decrees, he audaciously signed, “José de Galvez, mad in this world. Pray God he may be happy in the world to come."(3) Fr. Serra was considered his fit companion, also “mad” to be setting out with running sores on his leg on a long trek by land into uncharted territory with only 25 soldiers on horseback, three muleteers and 42 unpredictable Indians armed with bows and arrows.
What the naysayers did not take into account was the determination of the General, the zeal of the Friar and constant assistance of the indomitable Conquistadora.
Continued
Bibliography
1. Edna Kimbro, Julia Costello, Tevvy Ball, The California missions: history, art, and preservation, Getty Publications, 2009, p. 121.
2. Martin Morgado, Junipero Serra's Legacy, Pacific Grove, CA: Mount Carmel, 1987, p. 23.
3. Omer Englebert, The Last of the Conquistadors, Junipero Serra 1713-1784, New York: Harcourt, Brace. Place of Publication, 1956, p. 67Nancy Lusignan Schultz
|
|
|
|
| The Marvelous Origins of the Caravaca Cross |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-12-2022, 02:10 PM - Forum: Resources Online
- No Replies
|
|
The Marvelous Origins of the Caravaca Cross
Taken from here
![[Image: H158_BlueCross.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H158_BlueCross.jpg)
A copy of the Caravaca Cross
The Most Holy and True Cross of Caravaca is a familiar sight in the New World, brought here from Spain by the Jesuit and Franciscan missionaries. In our country, it is best known in the California Missions, made popular here by the great devotion of Frey Junípero Serra to the Caravaca Cross he kept with him always.
What is its origin? Few know the history of how it miraculously appeared in Caravaca in the 13th century, carried there by two Angels, whose images appear on it today as a memorial of that marvelous episode.
From Jerusalem to Caravaca
In the year 711 the invasion and occupation of the Iberian Peninsula by the Islamic Umayyad Caliphate started. It also marked the beginning of the glorious Reconquista, the period where the Spanish Catholics fought and re-conquered their land for Christ.
In the year 1231, a miracle occurred in the southeastern Spanish town of Caravaca. A missionary priest named Don Gínes Pérez Chirinos de Cuenca was captured and taken before the Muslim prince Ceyt Abuceyt. The Muslim chief asked him many questions about the Catholic Religion and, in particular, about the Sacrifice of the Mass.
The explanation of the priest interested him so much that he asked him to celebrate the Holy Mystery in his presence. The priest agreed and sent for the necessary articles to be brought from Concha, a town in the hands of the Catholics. The necessary items arrived but a crucifix was missing.
The priest prepared to begin the Mass, but then noted in dismay that the cross was missing. He told the King that the crucifix was lacking.
"But is that not one?" Ceyt Abuceyt asked.
The chamber became flooded with brilliant light and two Angels appeared, bearing a two-armed cross that they placed on the altar.
![[Image: H158_Miracle.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H158_Miracle.jpg)
Two angels transport the Cross from Jerusalem to Caravaca
Later it was verified that it was the same Cross – made with the wood of the Cross of Christ – that had belonged to Patriarch Robert of Jerusalem, the first Bishop of Jerusalem after the conquest of the city by the First Crusade in 1099.
The priest gave thanks to God and started the Mass. That marvelous occurrence triumphed over the infidelity of Ceyt Abuceyt. Shortly afterwards, he together with his court converted to Catholicism. This was regarded as a great victory for the Catholic Reconquista.
A powerful protection against danger & the Devil
As news of this Miraculous Crucifix spread, many persons traveled to see it and a multitude of miracles were attributed to it. It gained the reputation for healing and as being a powerful protection against dangers.
For example, in the 15th century, the town passed to the Knights Templar, who built the castle that still stands over the town today. Once, when Caravaca was under siege, the Knights Templar and townsfolk took refuge in the castle. When the water stored in the castle became contaminated, many persons fell ill.
![[Image: H158_Castillo.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H158_Castillo.jpg)
The Castle and Sanctuary of Caravaca de la Cruz
Several Knights snuck out of the castle at night to look for water but found the neighboring wells had also been poisoned. The Knights could only find some wine, which they brought in wineskins to the castle. That wine was blessed in the presence of the Caravaca Cross and served to the persons who were sick. They recovered immediately, so the wine was mixed with the undrinkable water in the storage tanks. The water became fresh and the Catholics were able to resist the enemy.
As its fame spread, a great number of copies of the Caravaca Cross were made and they also earned the reputation of being powerful protections against dangers, especially the malignant influence of the Devil. The town of Caravaca became a popular pilgrimage site as pilgrims flocked to honor the True Cross and ask for favors.
From the 14th century onward, papal bulls and decrees were issues granting special indulgences to the pilgrims of Caravaca. Soon there was hardly a family in Spain that did not have one and many persons began to wear copies of that Cross.
![[Image: H158_Horses.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H158_Horses.jpg)
More than 100 decorated horses are run down the main street of Caravaca in the Running of the Wine Horses
The cross is called the Vera Cruz of Caravaca and the city itself became identified with the precious relic. Today it is called Caravaca de la Cruz.
Every year the city celebrates the Festivities of the Most Holy and True Cross of Caravaca from May 1 to 5. During these festival days, multitudes gather for the religious procession, popular parades of Catholics and Moors, and events like the Running of the Wine Horses, celebrating the miracle of the wine flasks that were brought into town by the Knights Templar on horses.
The Caravaca Cross came to the New World with the Jesuits and Franciscan missionaries. Fr. Junípero Serra brought a copy of the Caravaca Cross with him when he set out from Mallorca, Spain, and it remained with him during his founding of the first nine Missions in California. He kept it with him always and it was buried with him when he died. During the exhumation of Serra’s body in 1943, it was found on his chest and today can be seen in the Carmel Mission Museum.
|
|
|
|
| King Charles co-hosted original ‘Great Reset’ meeting: ‘We have no alternative’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-12-2022, 05:50 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
King Charles co-hosted original ‘Great Reset’ meeting: ‘We have no alternative’
King Charles III, formerly Prince Charles, has given the strongest possible endorsement to radical Great Reset policies, in giving a speech to mark the launch of the project.
![[Image: King-Charles-810x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/King-Charles-810x500.jpeg)
LANARK, SCOTLAND - SEPTEMBER 07: Prince Charles, Prince of Wales, known as the Duke of Rothesay while in Scotland, during a roundtable with attendees of the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation seminar to discuss allergies and the environment, at Dumfries House, Cumnock on September 7, 2022 in Lanark, Scotland.
Jane Barlow - WPA Pool/Getty Images
Sep 9, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – Queen Elizabeth II’s son Charles, who ascended the British throne in the wake of her death on Thursday, co-hosted the original meeting for the Great Reset, a totalitarian initiative of the World Economic Forum, with WEF Chairman Klaus Schwab.
In a video released to mark the launch of the Great Reset, then-Prince Charles warned that the Great Reset plan, which includes “green” policies that would suffocate businesses and individual freedoms worldwide, is a matter of urgency.
“We have no alternative, because otherwise, unless we take the action necessary and we build again in a greener and more sustainable and more inclusive way, then we will end up having [more] pandemics and [more] disasters accelerating global warming and climate change,” said Charles, parroting the refrain of the WEF that major global interventions in business practices and consumption habits are needed to avert an “impending disaster.”
Charles proposed that the world “seize” the opportunity presented by the COVID-19 “crisis” — also a clarion call of the WEF — to create “a more circular bioeconomy that gives back to nature as much as we take.”
He noted that this would involve net zero carbon emissions and the use of carbon pricing to achieve this end, a system whereby the “external costs” of greenhouse gas emissions are tied to their sources to a price, usually on the carbon dioxide emitted. These costs can be conceived as accounting for alleged consequences of climate change are far removed from emissions themselves as damage to crops and loss of property from flooding.
In 2019, the U.K. became the first major economy to set a 2050 net zero carbon dioxide emissions target, the same proposed by the WEF in a challenge issued to their global business participants prior to their 2020 annual meeting.
In order to achieve this goal, the U.K. government’s chief scientific adviser has encouraged the British public to reduce their meat intake and fly less often to cut national carbon output. In a step further, U.K.’s Climate Change Committee went so far as to criticize the government for omitting demands for dietary and travel restrictions as part of its 2030 climate change strategy.
The committee proposed that individuals should cut their meat intake by around 20 percent before 2030 and a further 15 percent within the following 20 years in order to convert the land used for meat and dairy farming into space for trees.
Even short of such a government mandate, another major WEF proposal endorsed by King Charles III — carbon pricing — would ultimately hurt the middle and lower classes by driving up the cost of business and thereby passing down expenses to consumers, who would carry the burden of such “green” policies if businesses themselves aren’t forced to shut down first for lack of profit.
Meanwhile, over 1,100 scientists and professionals have signed a World Climate Declaration (WCD) declaring that “there is no climate emergency,” arguing that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, that natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause global warming, that the warming is far slower than predicted, and that such warming has not increased natural disasters.
The Great Reset has been described by conservatives as a threat not only to economic welfare, but to the family. As LifeSite reported, one of the key themes of the Reset is “LGBTI Inclusion.” Since June 2020, the World Economic Forum has run such articles as “Great Reset: Why LGBT+ inclusion is the secret to cities’ post-pandemic success” and “Why being an LGBT+ ally can transform lives – yours included.” With Microsoft and Pepsi, they rolled out a program called “Hour of Pride” to propagate “LGBTQI+ inclusion during the COVID-19 crisis.”
The WEF would ultimately co-opt nations and their sovereignty with the help of political leaders, such as WEF Young Global Leaders Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron who share the aims of the Great Reset, if not through outside pressure and influence, including the sway of wealthy mega-corporations allied with the WEF.
“What does the Great Reset look like? This is what it looks like: The people in charge doing whatever they want because they’re in charge. No principle is universal. No standard is evenly applied,” Tucker Carlson opined in 2020.
The British Monarchy has a long history of refraining from interference with the decisions of Parliament, and in fact, for the last several centuries, such interference has been very rare across the remaining monarchies of the world. However, British laws still require Royal Assent to go into effect, which will now come from King Charles III.
King Charles III as well as his father Prince Philip have both attended Bilderberg meetings, a highly secretive annual forum used by world elites since 1954 to further their vision for the world.
Addressing the claim that the meetings are used to achieve one-world government, Denis Healey, a Bilderberg group founder and steering committee member for 30 years, said in 2001, “To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair.”
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: Screenshot-2022-09-14-131543.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/5ynzMBqH/Screenshot-2022-09-14-131543.png)
