Taken from The Recusant - Issue 23 [January-February 2015]

Taken from The Recusant - Issue 22 [November-December 2014]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• . . . The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.
  . . . Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by everyone as true. ... But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”(Leo XIII, Satis Cogitum, 8 ff.)
  

• “And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brothers, We should mention again and censure a very grave error in which some Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error, and separated from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly quite contrary to Catholic teaching.” (Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 7)
  

• “This Council firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Council of Ferrara-Florence, Session XI)
  

Quote:“12. How so great a variety of opinions can clear the way for the unity of the Church, We know not. That unity can arise only from one teaching authority, one law of belief, and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from such a state of affairs it is but an easy step to the neglect of religion or “Indifferentism,” and to the error of the modernists, who hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, that it changes according to the varying necessities of time and place and the varying tendencies of the mind; that it is not contained in an immutable tradition, but can be altered to suit the needs of human life.

13. Furthermore, it is never lawful to employ in connection with articles of faith the distinction invented by some between “fundamental” and “non-fundamental” articles, the former to be accepted by all, the latter being left to the free acceptance of the faithful. The supernatural virtue of faith has as its formal motive the authority of God revealing, and this allows of no such distinction.” (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, 1928)

by John Vennari (Catholic Family News)

• It would produce an upheaval of such magnitude that the entire world would realize that the Catholic Church had undergone a major revolution in line with modern ideas. It would be clear to all that an "updating" had taken place.
  

• A new theology would be introduced that would be in contradiction to previous teachings.
  

• The Freemasons themselves would voice their cockle-doodle of triumph believing that the Catholic Church had finally "seen the light" on such points as pluralism, the secular state, equality of religions, and whatever other compromises had been achieved.
  

Quote:"Our ultimate end is that of Voltaire and the French Revolution - -the final destruction of Catholicism, and even of the Christian idea...

The Pope, whoever he is, will never come to the secret societies; it is up to the secret societies to take the first step toward the Church, with the aim of conquering both of them.

The task that we are going to undertake is not the work of a day, or of a month, or of a year; it may last several years, perhaps a century, but in our ranks the soldier dies and the struggle goes on.

We do not intend to win the Popes to our cause, to make them neophytes of our principles, propagators of our ideas. That would be a ridiculous dream; and if events turn out in some way, if Cardinals or prelates, for example, of their own free will or by surprise, should enter into a part of our secrets, this is not at all an incentive for desiring their elevation to the See of Peter. That elevation would ruin us. Ambition alone would have led them to apostasy, the requirements of power would force them to sacrifice us. What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs...

With that we will march more securely towards the assault on the Church than with pamphlets of our brethren in France and even the gold of England. Do you want to know the reason for this? It is that with this, in order to shatter the high rock on which God has built His Church, we no longer need Hannibalian vinegar, or need gunpowder, or even need our arms. We have the little finger of the successor of Peter engaged in the ploy, and this little finger is as good, for this crusade, as all the Urban IIs and all the Saint Bernards in Christendom.

We have no doubt that we will arrive at this supreme end of our efforts. But when? But how? The unknown is not yet revealed. Nevertheless, as nothing should turn us aside from the plan drawn up, and on the contrary everything should tend to this, as if as early as tomorrow success were going to crown the work that is barely sketched, we wish, in this instruction, which will remain secret for the mere initiates, to give the officials in the charge of the supreme Vente (Lodge) some advice that they should instill in all the brethren, in the form of instruction or of a memorandum.

Now then, to assure ourselves a Pope of the required dimensions, it is a question first of shaping him... for this Pope, a generation worthy of the reign we are dreaming of. Leave old people and those of a mature age aside; go to the youth, and if it is possible, even to the children. You will contrive for yourselves, at little cost, a reputation as good Catholics and pure patriots.

This reputation will put access to our doctrines into the midst of the young clergy, as well as deeply into the monasteries. In a few years, by the force of things, this young clergy will have overrun - all the functions; they will form the sovereign's council, they will be called to choose a Pontiff who should reign. And this Pontiff, like most of his contemporaries, will be necessarily more or less imbued with the Italian and, humanitarian principles that we are going to begin to put into circulation. It is a small grain of black mustard that we are entrusting to the ground; but the sunshine of justice will develop it up to the highest power, and you will see one day what a rich harvest this small seed will produce.

In the path that we are laying out for our brethren, there are found great obstacles to conquer, difficulties of more than one kind to master. They will triumph over them by experience and by nearsightedness; but the goal is so splendid that it is important to put all the sail to the wind in order to reach it. You want to revolutionize Italy, look for the Pope whose portrait we have just drawn. You wish to establish the reign of the chosen ones on the throne of the prostitute of Babylon; let the Clergy march under your standard, always believing that they are marching under the banner of the apostolic keys. You intend to make the last vestige of tyrants and the oppressors disappear; lay your snares (nets) like Simon Bar-Jona; lay them in the sacristies, the seminaries, and the monasteries rather than at the bottom of the sea: and if you do not hurry, we promise you a catch more miraculous than his. The fisher of fish became the fisher of men; you will bring friends around the apostolic Chair. You will have preached a resolution in tiara and in cope, marching with the cross and the banner, a revolution that will need to be only a little bit urged on to set fire to the four corners of the world."(7)

Quote:There are those who ask what authority, what theological qualification the Council intended to give to its teachings, knowing that it avoided issuing solemn dogmatic definitions engaging the infallibility of the ecclesiastical Magisterium. The answer is known by whoever remembers the conciliar declaration of March 6, 1964, repeated on November 16, 1964: Given the Council's pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing, in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility. . . (43)

1. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol, 3 (New York: Encyclopedia Press, 1913), pp. 330-331.
   
2. Rev. E. Cahill, S.J. Freemasonry and the Anti-Christian Movement (Dublin: Gill, 1959), p. 101.
   
3. Yves Marsaudon, quoted in Dr. Rudolph Graber, Athanasius and the Church of our Time (Palmdale, CA: Christian Book Club, 1974), p. 39.
   
4. Cretineau-Joly, The Roman Church and Revolution,Vol. 2, orig. ed., 1859, reprinted by Circle of the French Renaissance, Paris, 1976. Msgr. Delassus reproduced these documents again in his work The Anti-Christian Conspiracy, Desclee de Brouwer, 1910, Tome III, pp. 1035-1092.
   
5. Michael Davies, Pope John's Council (Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1992), p. 166.
   
6. Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus-On Freemasonry(Rockford, IL: TAN, 1978), par. 31.
   
7. Msgr. Delassus, The Anti-Christian Conspiracy (Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1910), Tome III, pp. 1035-1092. The full text of "The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita" is also published in: Msgr. Dillon, Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked (Dublin: Gill, 1885; Palmdale, Calif.: Christian Book Club, n.d.), pp. 51-56.
   
8. For a true understanding of Catholic doctrine vs. modern errors, it is imperative to study the Papal Encyclicals and other documents against Liberalism, Modernism and
   
9. Freemasonry from the 19th and early 20th-century Popes. The most important of these are collected in The Popes against Modern Errors: 16 Papal Documents (Rockford: TAN, 1999).
   
10. Fr. Denis Fahey, The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World, C.S.Sp. (Dublin: Regina Publications, 1939), chap. VII.
    
11. Quoted in ibid., p. 116 (143).
    
12. Fr. Vincent Miceli, The Antichrist (Harrison, NY: Roman Catholic Books), p. 133.
    
13. Pope Pius X, Pascendi ("On Modernism"), par. 1.
    
14. Fr. Vincent Miceli, The Antichrist (cassette lecture) (Keep the Faith, Inc.).
    
15. Raymond Dulac, Episcopal Collegiality at the Second Council of the Vatican (Paris: Cedre, 1979), pp. 9-10.
    
16. Graber, op. cit., p. 34.
    
17. Ibid., pp. 34, 35.
    
18. Ibid., p. 35.
    
19. Ibid.
    
20. Ibid., p. 36.
    
21. Ibid.
    
22. A full account of this fascinating history can be found in: Frere Michel of the Holy Trinity, The Whole Truth About Fatima, Volume 3: The Third Secret (Ft. Erie, Ontario: Immaculate Heart Publications, 1990), pp. 257-304.
    
23. Ibid., p. 298.
    
24. Vicomte Leon de Poncins, Freemasonry and the Vatican (Palmdale, CA: Christian Book Club, 1968), p. 14.
    
25. Bouyer, Dom Lambert Beauduin A Man of the Church (Casterman, 1964) pp. 180-181. Quoted by Fr. Dilder Bonneterre in The Liturgical Movement (Ed. Fideliter, 1980), P. 119.
    
26. Cf. Fr. Ralph Wiltgen S.V.D., The Rhine Flows into the Tiber (New York: Hawthorne, 1967; TAN, 1985); Michael Davies, Pope John's Council (New York: Arlington House, 1977;
    
27. Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1992); and Bishop Wycislo (see next note), which sings praises of the reform.
    
28. Most Rev. Aloysius Wycislo, Vatican II Revisited: Reflections by One Who Was There (Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1987), p. x.
    
29. Ibid., p. 33.
    
30. Ibid., p. 27.
    
31. Ibid., pp. 27-34.
    
32. The entire story of the hijacking of the Council by liberal prelates and theologians, and the tragic consequences of this modernist coup, are superbly explained in Fr. Ralph Wiltgen,
    
33. S.V.D.'s The Rhine Flows into the Tiber (New York: Hawthorne, 1967; TAN, 1985) and in Michael Davies' Pope John's Council (New York: Arlington House, 1977; Kansas City:
    
34. Angelus Press, 1992).
    
35. This tactic was admitted by liberal Council peritus Father Edward Schillebeeckx. He said, "We will express it in a diplomatic way, but after the Council, we will draw the implicit conclusions." (Cited from the Dutch magazine De Bazuin, No. 16, 1965, in Iota Unum, by Romano Amerio, Kansas City, MO: Sarto House, 1996.) Another quote (or translation of the same quote) from Fr. Schillebeeckx reads, "We have used ambiguous phrases during the Council and we know how we will interpret them afterwards' " (Archbishop Marcel
    
36. Lefebvre, An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1992, p. 106.)
    
37. Cf. Michael Davies' The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty (Long Prairie, MN: Neumann Press, 1992) for evidence that Vatican II's Dignitatis Humanae (particularly Art. 2) reflects a contradiction with previous Papal teaching. The same is admitted without compunction by the progressive Council theologian Fr. Yves Cougar. See p. 26 of this booklet.
    
38. Quoted in Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, An Open Letter to Confused Catholics (Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1992), p. 89.
    
39. Ibid., pp. 88-89.
    
40. Le Catholicisme Liberal, 1969; also Lefebvre, op. cit., P. 100.
    
41. The great theologian, Cardinal Juan de Torquemada (1388-1468), citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, teaches that it is possible for even a Pope to go against the universal customs of the Church. Torquemada writes, "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states (De Consuetudine) that it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things so long as he himself does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, he need not be followed . . ." Cited from Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div., A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, 2nd edition (St. Francis Press, India), p. 29.
    
42. Lefebvre, op. cit., p. 100.
    
43. Yves Cougar, O.P., Challenge to the Church (London, 1977), p. 147, in Michael Davies, The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty (Long Prairie, MN: Neumann Press, 1992), p. 203.
    
44. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1987), pp. 381-382.
    
45. Lefebvre, op. cit., p. 100.
    
46. Interview of Bishop Morris by Kieron Wood, Catholic World News, September 27, 1997.
    
47. Lefebvre, op. cit., p. 107.
    
48. Paul VI, General Audience of January 12, 1966, in Insegnamenti di Paolo VI, vol. 4, p. 700, in Atila Sinke Guimaraes, In the Murky Waters of Vatican II (Metairie: MAETA, 1997; TAN, 1999), pp. 111-112.