| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 315
» Latest member: Cynsauer
» Forum threads: 7,549
» Forum posts: 13,874
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 672 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 669 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Internet Archive
|
| Latest Threads |
Bulletin of the Oratory o...
Forum: Bulletin of the Oratory of the Sorrowful Heart of Mary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:14 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 70
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:06 PM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 17,549
|
Dom Prosper Guéranger: Th...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:06 PM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 28,055
|
Third Sunday of Advent [G...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 05:05 PM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 24,128
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: 3rd ...
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
12-13-2025, 10:45 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 84
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St....
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
12-13-2025, 11:02 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 129
|
The Way Of Perfection by ...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
12-12-2025, 11:24 AM
» Replies: 26
» Views: 3,760
|
Feast of Our Lady of Guad...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
12-12-2025, 11:23 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 22,382
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Our...
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
12-12-2025, 10:17 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 186
|
Fr. Hewko: Work of St. J...
Forum: December 2025
Last Post: Deus Vult
12-11-2025, 01:19 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 183
|
|
|
| Scientists working on mRNA shots for ‘every imaginable infectious disease,’ researcher claims |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-01-2025, 10:23 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
 |
Scientists working on mRNA shots for ‘every imaginable infectious disease,’ researcher claims
The dangers of mRNA shots are so well documented that 11 states have thus far pursued bans on them.
![[Image: MRNA-e1697017546760.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/MRNA-e1697017546760.jpeg)
mRNA vaccines
Shutterstock
Apr 30, 2025
(LifeSiteNews) — A Nobel Prize-winning researcher who contributed to mRNA technology has said the gene therapy platform is being explored for “every imaginable infectious disease,” raising health concerns due to the dangers of mRNA shots.
Attorney Tom Renz recently warned that “all the childhood vaccines are going to be gene therapies” and that mRNA is now being integrated “into every vaccine out there,” although LifeSiteNews has not heard back from Renz after inquiring into his claim.
However, PennMedicine’s Dr. Drew Weissmann, who was jointly awarded with Dr. Katalin Karikó the 2023 Nobel Prize in Medicine for contributing to the modified mRNA technology of Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID “vaccines,” has said regarding this technology, “We’re working on every imaginable infectious disease.”
In addition, when presented with this prediction by Renz, Dr. Peter McCullough pointed LifeSiteNews to a pipeline of many mRNA so-called “vaccines” in development by Moderna. McCullough responded, “Yes, Moderna is one of many mRNA companies with an extensive portfolio of vaccines in development.”
The pharmaceutical company, which produced one of the most widely used mRNA COVID injections – and according to Open VAERS, the deadliest – is now working on a variety of mRNA “vaccines” for the flu, RSV, new variants of COVID, HIV, EBV, Lyme disease, Monkeypox, and many other viruses and diseases, including cancer.
PennMedicine has also listed a wide range of diseases for which mRNA injections are being studied or developed, including “all coronaviruses,” avian bird flu, malaria, genetic diseases, heart attacks, and neurodevelopmental disorders.
This is alarming considering the dangerous track record of mRNA injections. The U.S. federal government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which historically has recorded only a small fraction of vaccine injuries, has as of March 28 reported 38,541 deaths from the COVID shots, higher by far than those reported for any other vaccines since 1990. A total of 1,662,426 adverse events from the COVID shots have also been reported to VAERS.
The Pfizer and Moderna COVID shots, which accounted for most injections, are distinguished from traditional vaccines by their mRNA technology, which did not come to market before the COVID outbreak largely due to safety concerns. In fact, as of May 2020, only one of Moderna’s mRNA candidates had passed Phase 1 trials, and StatNews had noted in 2016 that mRNA-based treatments are “highly risky,” and that “(b)ig pharma companies had tried similar work and abandoned it because it’s exceedingly hard to get RNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.”
“Novartis abandoned the related realm of RNA interference over concerns about toxicity, as did Merck and Roche,” StatNews continued.
The dangers of mRNA shots are so well documented that 11 states have thus far pursued bans on them.
The mRNA COVID shots are theoretically supposed to work by injecting genetic mRNA material in the body that instructs cells to produce an antigen that in turn triggers an immune response. In the case of the COVID shots, this antigen is a spike protein, to which many doctors and researchers are attributing toxic effects of the mRNA shots.
Doctors, including surgeon and cancer drug inventor Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, have explained that these spike proteins are inflammatory and attach to blood vessels with ACE-2 receptors found all throughout the body.
The toxic effects of spike proteins appear to be confirmed by Yale University scientists, who in February published a study linking post-COVID shot illness (“post-vaccination syndrome”) to distinct biomarkers, including elevated levels of circulating spike protein.
One of the concerns regarding mRNA technology is that it appears to produce inflammatory, symptom-inducing antigens indefinitely, at least in the case of the COVID shots. A practicing physician and Substack writer known as The Midwestern Doctor has pointed out that numerous studies show that after a COVID shot, spike protein production in the blood peaks, “and then declines but never reaches zero and appears to continue for months afterward.”
Despite the dangers of mRNA “vaccines,” they are being pushed by some of the most influential men in America, like Oracle chairman Larry Ellison, who has suggested AI could be used to rapidly develop new mRNA-based vaccines personalized for individual patients.
|
|
|
| Bishop Strickland calls on Cardinal Farrell to recuse himself from the conclave |
|
Posted by: Stone - 05-01-2025, 06:23 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Bishop Strickland calls on Cardinal Farrell to recuse himself from the conclave
Cardinal Kevin Farrell's ties to the Legionaries of Christ and ex-cardinal McCarrick
– both linked to major abuse scandals – are cause for deep concern.
![[Image: Untitled-16.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Untitled-16.png)
Bishop Joseph Strickland
YouTube/Screenshot
Apr 30, 2025
(LifeSiteNews) — In these critical days, as the eyes of the faithful turn toward Rome with concern and hope, it becomes the solemn duty of every shepherd of souls to speak with clarity, guided not by fear or favor, but by the light of the Gospel and fidelity to the Bride of Christ.
It is with a heavy heart that I must address the troubling circumstances surrounding Cardinal Kevin Farrell. His longstanding ties to the Legionaries of Christ – a congregation whose founder was guilty of egregious crimes and abuses – are already a cause for deep concern. Cardinal Farrell’s administrative role within that community during those years, especially in the financial domain, raises questions that have never received sufficient public clarification.
Yet even more disturbing is his close association with former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. It is well known that Cardinal Farrell was not merely acquainted with McCarrick but was chosen by him as a trusted associate. The faithful cannot ignore the profound gravity of this connection, especially in light of the criminal and moral depravity now revealed in McCarrick’s case. Victims of abuse, and indeed all Catholics who seek transparency and justice, rightly ask how such an alliance could have remained unchallenged for so long.
Since 2019, Cardinal Farrell has held the office of Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, a role of great influence in the governance of the Church during a sede vacante and in the preparation of a conclave. In that capacity, Cardinal Farrell has access to information and influence that few others possess. If, as many fear, he has knowledge of McCarrick’s accomplices and enablers, then a dark shadow looms over any role he might play in the conclave – whether through pressure, persuasion, or silence.
In such times, we are not without precedent. In 2013, Cardinal Keith O’Brien of Edinburgh, acknowledging his own unworthiness, voluntarily withdrew from the conclave that elected Pope Francis. He did so not under duress, but in conscience, understanding that the Church’s integrity demanded such a sacrifice.
I therefore call upon Cardinal Kevin Farrell to renounce his role as Camerlengo and to withdraw from participation in the papal conclave, for the sake of the Church’s credibility, for the healing of victims, and for the restoration of trust among the faithful – especially here in the United States.
This is not a call for vengeance, or a judgment of his soul, but a humble appeal for integrity, prudence, and ecclesial charity. Silence in the face of scandal is no longer an option. Let us walk in the light so that the darkness may be overcome.
|
|
|
|
| Beware the “Conservative Savior” |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-30-2025, 10:37 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet
- No Replies
|
|
I recently read the following comment, which well captures the current situation:
"Whoever follows Francis will almost certainly prove to be yet another calamity – like a serpent shedding its skin, appearing fresh yet unchanged in its intent, still cunning, still venomous. The Catholic Church, betrayed by her own guardians, has been delivered into the hands of her adversaries."
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
Beware the “Conservative Savior”
![[Image: rs=w:1280]](https://img1.wsimg.com/isteam/ip/df55e1a9-c854-4d0b-a2a9-94177954436c/IMG_4488.png/:/cr=t:0%25,l:0%25,w:100%25,h:100%25/rs=w:1280)
The Catholic Trumpet [slightly adapted and reformatted] | April 29, 2025
The enemy has prepared a new snare.
Not through another radical like Francis, but through the illusion of restoration.
A conservative pope may soon rise—perhaps someone like Cardinal Sarah—who speaks with reverence, offers the Latin Mass, and appears to undo past abuses.
We are praying that God will grant the Church a holy pope.
We pray that He lift the eclipse that now covers the visible Church and bring about a true return to the full Catholic Faith.
But we must also be vigilant.
Because if the next pope reverses certain excesses while leaving the core of Vatican II untouched, this will not be a restoration.
It will be the final deception.
It will be the absorption of Tradition into the structure of apostasy.
As +Archbishop Lefebvre warned, “They are working to lead us, slowly but surely, into their way of thinking, into their apostasy.”
This is not the time for sentiment.
It is the time for clarity.
False Restorations in History
History shows that false restorations often bring deeper ruin.
In 1801, Pope Pius VII signed a Concordat with Napoleon.
It was welcomed as the return of the Church in France.
Seminaries reopened. Churches were restored.
But the Pope formally renounced claims to confiscated Church property and accepted government control over bishops.
Soon after, Napoleon had him imprisoned.
The peace was a trap.
In 1929, Pope Pius XI signed the Lateran Treaty with Mussolini.
This established the Vatican as a sovereign state and resolved the long-standing Roman Question.
But the Church agreed to diplomatic silence regarding certain state policies, giving room for the rise of a secular ideology hostile to the Social Kingship of Christ.
In 1933, another concordat was signed with the German regime.
While it initially protected Church property and rights, it also constrained public Catholic opposition at a time when clarity was most needed.
These examples teach one lesson.
When peace is pursued without doctrinal firmness, it leads not to order, but to capitulation.
Today, the same danger returns.
A pope who appears to restore the old liturgy, but does not renounce the heresies of Vatican II, would be a false peace.
He would offer the form of Catholicism without its substance.
Theological Foundations
Catholics must understand what the Church truly teaches about papal elections.
The Holy Ghost preserves the Church from error in Her official teaching, but He does not guarantee saintly or orthodox popes at every moment in history.
The freedom of men remains.
Popes are not inspired prophets; they are judged by their fidelity to the unchanging Deposit of Faith.
There is also much confusion about the phrase, “the law of prayer is the law of belief”—lex orandi, lex credendi.
Many think that if the traditional Mass returns, the Faith must be returning with it.
But this is backwards.
Pope Pius XII taught in Mediator Dei:
“The Church’s teaching office and law of belief precede and determine the law of prayer.”
He added, “The liturgy does not determine independently and of itself what is of Catholic faith. It must be in entire harmony with the doctrines of the Church.” (Mediator Dei, 1947)
If Vatican II’s false doctrines remain—religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality—then no amount of incense, Latin, or chant will change the reality.
The Faith remains wounded.
+Archbishop Lefebvre said it plainly:
“This conciliar Church is a schismatic Church because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new priests, its new faith, its new seminaries, its new universities, its new catechisms, its new liturgy.”
The Mass of all time cannot be used to cover the theology of apostasy.
The Modernist Strategy: A “Conservative” Pope
Why would the modernists allow a conservative pope?
Because the crisis has gone too far.
The scandals of Francis have woken up too many Catholics.
The mask is slipping.
The best way to regain control now is to offer back Tradition—but only partially.
To present a pope who wears the cassock, praises the old Mass, and speaks of reverence—yet still upholds the documents of Vatican II.
This would sedate what’s left of the resistance.
It would draw in the neo-SSPX, Trad Inc., and every well-meaning soul longing for peace.
It would bring them under the same errors they once opposed, only now with a Latin Mass in the background.
Pope Saint Pius X warned in Pascendi Dominici Gregis:
“In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, they seek to express their errors in a Catholic way.” (Pascendi, 1907)
Today, the revolution wears a chasuble.
Tradition Inc. and the Neo-SSPX: Preparing for Capitulation
For years now, many traditional groups have been conditioned to see any step toward tradition as a victory, even when the doctrine remains compromised.
They applauded gestures from Rome, even as the Council’s errors remained untouched.
They hoped that good will and respectful tone would save them.
But the trap was being set.
Many of these organizations depend on recognition from Rome, donations from followers, or respectability in conservative media.
A pope who seems friendly to tradition would be the perfect excuse to surrender.
And they will call it “unity.”
Archbishop Lefebvre warned in 1988, “They are working hard to bring us back to the Council by way of tradition. They are hypocrites.”
The goal is not restoration.
It is absorption.
The Final Warning and the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart
In recent months, whispers have circulated among Traditional Catholics about a supposed “conservative Pope” strategy—the idea that the Conciliar Church might present certain sympathetic prelates as a lure to draw the faithful back into the post–Vatican II fold.
We must not underestimate this tactic.
As Pope St. Pius X warned, the modernist error is “the synthesis of all heresies.” (Pascendi, 1907)
In other words, an apparently orthodox veneer can conceal a wholly corrupt system of doctrine.
A halfway return to the post-conciliar hierarchy on the grounds of “unity” only risks swallowing a poison that will undermine true Catholic faith from within.
Pius X warned that such compromise leads “to the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone, but of all religion” — because modernism doesn’t merely corrupt Catholicism; it dissolves the very notion of revealed truth, reducing all religion to subjective feeling and ultimately preparing the world for total unbelief.
Even a single concession paves the way for the enemy’s plan to flourish.
The strategy of promoting a “conservative” figure is applauded by the rationalists of our age, who recognize that their greatest ally is one who appears to be orthodox while secretly advancing novelty.
Every pastoral concession, no matter how small, makes it easier for the Conciliar Church to absorb the faithful into a system ultimately alien to Tradition.
Saint Paul’s warning is particularly apt:
“If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Corinthians 14:8)
A Church that sends mixed messages—partway restoring traditional forms while retaining conciliar errors—will leave the faithful confused and unable to fight the good fight.
Christ Himself warned, “You shall be hated by all men for My Name’s sake, but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.” (Matthew 10:22)
Better to endure exile than accept a false peace.
We cannot judge solely by appearances or personal piety.
We must judge doctrine by doctrine.
As Vatican I declared: “The Roman Pontiff is judged by no one.”
Claims of a “truly conservative” pope must be tested against the unchanging Deposit of Faith.
The solution is not to seek comfort within the Conciliar structure but to persevere in fidelity to the one true Church of Christ.
Yet we are not left without hope.
Our Lady has promised: “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.” (Fatima, 1917)
As St. John reveals in the Apocalypse: “They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony.” (Revelation 12:11)
The darkest plots of our enemies cannot withstand the power of Christ’s Sacrifice and the intercession of the Mother of God.
Let us remain faithful to the traditional Magisterium and the valid sacraments entrusted to us.
Let us trust that Our Lord will use our sufferings to purify His Church.
The Conciliar hierarchy may plot many schemes, but the true Church belongs to Christ and His Vicar.
At this moment of confusion and trial, we pledge ourselves anew to the immutable truth.
The path of compromise leads only to ruin.
The path of fidelity leads to eternal salvation.
We echo the cry of the saints:
All is accomplished for Christ’s Church. The victory is certain through the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Let us hold fast to that sure promise, so that in the end we may share in the glory which Heaven has prepared.
References
Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, 1907
Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 1947
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, conferences and letters
First Vatican Council, Pastor Aeternus, 1870
1 Corinthians 14:8
Matthew 10:22
Revelation 12:11
Fatima Message, 1917
|
|
|
|
| Mark Carney wins Canadian election as Liberals secure fourth term: reports |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-29-2025, 12:01 PM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
Mark Carney wins Canadian election as Liberals secure fourth term: reports
According to CTV News and other outlets, the Liberals are slated to form a minority government with Mark Carney
continuing on in the role as prime minister.
![[Image: GettyImages-2204533534.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2204533534.jpg)
Mark Carney addresses the media after being sworn in as Canada’s 24th Prime Minister at Rideau Hall on March 14, 2025, in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Minas Panagiotakis / Getty Images
Apr 28, 2025
(LifeSiteNews [adapted - not all hyperlinks included]) — The Liberal Party of Canada under leader Mark Carney will form a minority government, continuing the Liberals’ nearly decade-long reign, according to CTV News and other outlets.
According to Monday’s ongoing election results, the Liberals are slated to form a minority government with Carney continuing on in the role as prime minister. The victory comes after Carney took over for Justin Trudeau as party leader earlier this year. The Liberals have been in power since 2015, with today’s results securing the party a fourth consecutive term.
Under Carney, the Liberals are expected to continue much of what they did under Trudeau, including the party’s zealous push in favor of abortion, euthanasia, radical gender ideology, internet regulation and so-called “climate change” policies. Indeed, Carney, like Trudeau, seems to have extensive ties to both China and the globalist World Economic Forum, connections which were brought up routinely by conservatives in the lead-up to the election.
Poilievre’s defeat comes as many social conservatives felt betrayed by the leader, who more than once on the campaign trail promised to maintain the status quo on abortion – which is permitted through all nine months of pregnancy – and euthanasia, and who failed to directly address a number of moral issues like the LGBT agenda.
As always, LifeSiteNews encourages all readers to pray for the conversion of their political leaders to the Catholic faith.
This story is developing…
|
|
|
|
| Francis Was a Faithful Son of the Vatican II Revolution |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-29-2025, 12:00 PM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Francis Was a Faithful Son of the Vatican II Revolution
![[Image: 1419fffbc52dfd544b9ffc7c742dddcf_L.jpg]](https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/media/k2/items/cache/1419fffbc52dfd544b9ffc7c742dddcf_L.jpg)
Robert Morrison, Remnant Columnist | April 23, 2025
Francis was a faithful son of the Vatican II revolution. If he managed to save his soul, then surely he will pray for us to learn the most important lesson of his hostile occupation of the papacy: that all the harm he caused was directly related to the changes set in motion at the Council.
Jorge Bergoglio was ordained to the priesthood on December 19, 1969, four years after the close of Vatican II. His immediate predecessors — John Paul II and Benedict XVI — had been influential experts at the Council, but Francis was the first claimant to the papacy to have been formed in the priesthood during the period of revolutionary change propelled by Vatican II. While this does not absolve him of responsibility for his actions, it should help form our assessment of Francis’s role in Church history and learn the lessons that God wants us to learn from the harms he caused.
In his 1968 book about the Council’s aftermath, Is It the Same Church?, Frank Sheed introduced his topic by describing the way in which the Catholic world changed after the Council:
Quote:“My own feeling is that all the changes ushered in by Pope John XXIII were made possible by the forty years which preceded him. But how fast and furiously they have come. Consider how things would strike a Catholic wrecked in 1957 on a desert island and only just now brought home. His Catholic friends have him in their houses. In all of them he finds the conversation beyond him. It circles, sometimes heatedly, around two words which mean nothing to him — Ecumenism and the Pill.” (p. xi)
Sheed was of course referring to debates among Catholics about contraception (which would become the subject of Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae) and the false ecumenism that animated Vatican II. Sheed continued:
Quote:“The weeks that follow are full of shocks. The priest facing the congregation takes some getting used to. And Mass in English even more. He remembers arguments with Protestants in which his trump card had been the use of Latin as proof of the Church’s Catholicity — ‘one language everywhere in the world.’ . . . Whichever way he looks, the Catholic world he knew seems to have turned upside down — and so quickly: after all, he was only away ten years. He hears of priests getting married, with other priests performing the ceremony. He hears of nuns in picket-lines, nuns marching with Negroes and communists in Alabama; of seminarians picketing Cardinals, refusing daily Mass, declaring the Pope unfitted for his primacy.’ (pp. xi-xii)
This is what Jorge Bergoglio would have known during his priestly formation. It was not simply a matter of new beliefs, practices, and disciplines — all around him the Catholic world was unstable, with the only certainty being a radical departure from what had been standard in the eyes of most Catholics prior to the Council.
Elsewhere in Is It the Same Church?, Sheed listed ten matters he would consider changing if he was Pope:
Quote:“(1) The election of the Pope by the Cardinals; . . .
(2) The appointment of all Bishops by Rome;
(3) Clerical celibacy;
(4) The obligation of Sunday Mass;
(5) Diocesan seminaries;
(6) Communion in one kind only;
(7) Reservation of the Blessed Sacrament;
(8) Marriage in the presence of the priest;
(9) Vestments, special clerical dress, various titles and insignia;
(10) Censorship, the Index, Imprimaturs, etc.” (p. 9)
Sheed is still well-respected in Traditional Catholic circles today, with his books remaining in Traditional Catholic bookstores and online catalogs. As we can see, though, the list he compiled while Bergoglio was still a seminarian includes a few items most Traditional Catholics would consider to be impermissible changes. It should thus come as no surprise that a priest formed during this time would wholeheartedly embrace the revolutionary spirit that Sheed clearly adopted after the Council.
As another frame of reference, we can consider Yves Congar, one of the most important experts at Vatican II. In his farewell address to the clergy of Rome, Benedict XVI listed Congar among the “great figures” from Vatican II:
Quote:“And this continued throughout the Council: small-scale meetings with peers from other countries. Thus I came to know great figures like Father de Lubac, Daniélou, Congar, and so on.”
So Benedict XVI spoke well of Congar, who had been made a Cardinal by John Paul II. But Congar understood the revolutionary spirit of Vatican II quite well because he had helped kindle it:
Quote:“By the frankness and openness of its debates, the Council has put an end to what may be described as the inflexibility of the system. We take ‘system’ to mean a coherent set of codified teachings, casuistically-specified rules of procedure, a detailed and very hierarchic organization, means of control and surveillance, rubrics regulating worship — all this is the legacy of scholasticism, the Counter-reformation and the Catholic Restoration of the nineteenth century, subjected to an effective Roman discipline. It will be recalled that Pius XII is supposed to have said: ‘I will be the last Pope to keep all this going.’” (Congar, Challenge to the Church: The Case of Archbishop Lefebvre, pp. 51-52)
In other words, Vatican II not only yielded certain identifiable changes in belief and practice but also fostered an environment in which almost everything else was subject to change. It should come as no surprise, then, that Francis cited Congar as an inspiration for the most revolutionary project of his occupation of the papacy, the Synod on Synodality:
Quote:The Holy Spirit guides us where God wants us to be, not to where our own ideas and personal tastes would lead us. Father Congar, of blessed memory, once said: ‘There is no need to create another Church, but to create a different Church’ (True and False Reform in the Church). That is the challenge. For a ‘different Church,’ a Church open to the newness that God wants to suggest, let us with greater fervour and frequency invoke the Holy Spirit and humbly listen to him, journeying together as he, the source of communion and mission, desires: with docility and courage.”
Congar had been suspected of heresy during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII and should never have been allowed to play a pivotal role at Vatican II. It was an insult to the Holy Ghost for John XXIII to appoint Congar (like Rahner, Kung, etc.) as an expert at the Council. Ideas have consequences: once you break with Tradition and endorse radical change in the Church, there are few boundaries to the amount of destruction that can occur.
Who was supposed to convince Francis that Congar and the other Vatican II revolutionaries were wrong? The primary opponent of the Vatican II revolution, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, had been censured by Paul VI and excommunicated by John Paul II, two men canonized by Francis. And the conservative Catholics who ought to have opposed the Vatican II revolution have instead directed their energy toward supporting the Council’s innovations against anyone who has sided with Archbishop Lefebvre.
Francis was a faithful son of the Vatican II revolution. If he managed to save his soul, then surely he will pray for us to learn the most important lesson of his hostile occupation of the papacy: that all the harm he caused was directly related to the changes set in motion at the Council. Regardless of whether Francis saved his soul, though, it seems evident that God wants us to abandon the anti-Catholic ideas that have plagued the Church since the Council. If we refuse to do this, then we deserve for the next claimant to the papacy to be even more anti-Catholic than Francis. May God have mercy on him and us.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.
|
|
|
|
| Conclave to elect new pope will start on May 7 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-28-2025, 07:35 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Conclave to elect new pope will start on May 7
The conclave will see cardinals gather in the Sistine Chapel to elect a new pope as the 267th Roman Pontiff.
![[Image: 0DBB187C-3686-405B-851B-8161270D060B_1_1...0x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/0DBB187C-3686-405B-851B-8161270D060B_1_105_c-e1741541127712-810x500.jpeg)
Apr 28, 2025
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican has confirmed that the new conclave will start on May 7, as cardinals look to elect the new pope following Francis’ death.
After the close of the General Congregation this morning, the Holy See Press Office confirmed to journalists that the conclave will commence on May 7, next Wednesday. This falls in the time scale set by the Church’s law, which mandates the conclave start between 15 and 20 days following the death of a pope.
Pope Francis died on April 21, a week ago today.
His funeral was held on Saturday, as cardinals have continued to grow in number at the Vatican as they return to the City State from across the world.
May 7 will see the cardinals gather for a Mass in the morning, as they pray for guidance for the forthcoming conclave. They will then process into the Sistine Chapel for the first round of voting to be held in the afternoon.
This story is developing…
|
|
|
|
| Disgraced former LA Cardinal Roger Mahony chosen to help seal Francis’ casket |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-26-2025, 05:42 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Disgraced former LA Cardinal Roger Mahony chosen to help seal Francis’ casket
Mahony, 89, is widely considered to be one of the worst clerics of the past forty years,
having been implicated in a massive sex abuse cover-up in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.
![[Image: GettyImages-107780367-e1745598574413-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/GettyImages-107780367-e1745598574413-810x500.jpg)
LOS ANGELES, CA - DECEMBER 25: Cardinal Roger Mahony leads Christmas mass at The Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels December 25, 2010 in Los Angeles, California.
Eric Thayer / Getty Images
Apr 25, 2025
(LifeSiteNews) — Disgraced U.S. Cardinal Roger Mahony has been chosen to help seal Pope Francis’ casket for his funeral this weekend.
Mahony, 89, is widely considered to be one of the worst clerics in the U.S. over the past forty years. He served as the Archbishop of Los Angeles from 1985 until 2011. As a result of his covering up of abuse, the archdiocese paid out more than $660 million to more than 500 victims over the course of his tenure.
Following his retirement, Mahony was scandalously allowed by Los Angeles Archbishop Jose Gomez to participate in the archdiocese’s religious education conference in 2019.
Mahony took part in the 2019 installation Mass of former archbishop of Washington, D.C. Cardinal Wilton Gregory, who was an acolyte of Theodore McCarrick, the former, now deceased, archbishop of Washington D.C. He also participated in the installation Mass of Archbishop Joe Vásquez in the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston this March.
News of Mahony’s involvement in the ceremony was not well received by Catholics.
“Shame on him for participating in the public rite for Pope Francis, and shame on the College of Cardinals for allowing him to do so,” Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of Bishop Accountability.org, told the New York Post.
Author Peachy Keenan echoed those sentiments on X. “I will be boycotting the Pope’s funeral because the Vatican has chosen to include Cardinal Roger Mahony closely in the funeral ceremony. He is personally responsible for the mass rape of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of small boys in California and should be doing hard time in San Quentin, not frolicking in Rome. Shame on everyone involved in this travesty,” she remarked.
In 2013 a court demanded that some 12,000 pages related to Mahony’s time in office be released. The documents showed Mahony purposely concealed from the public knowledge of priests who had committed sex crimes with minors, and that he transferred the perpetrators after they received counseling only to have them sexually abuse again and again. The abuses were so severe that Gomez commented at the time, “the behavior described in these files is terribly sad and evil.”
Vatican spokesperson Matteo Bruni said that Mahony was chosen based on his seniority as a cardinal. But Mahony told ABC 7 News that he and Francis often communicated.
“He encouraged us to write to him,” Mahony said. “I don’t know if anybody else did, but I started writing to him, and he answers the letters. I have, I don’t know the final number, over 30 letters back from the pope, Pope Francis. He responds to them.”
Francis’ funeral will take place Saturday at 10 a.m. in St. Peter’s Square. LifeSite’s Michael Haynes reports that a “small group of transsexuals” will attend. The coffin ceremony will take place Friday at 8pm in St. Peter’s as well. It will be overseen by Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, and will include Cardinals Pietro Parolin and Giovanni Battista Re, as well Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra, among others.
|
|
|
|
| ‘Transgender’ individuals to welcome Pope Francis’ coffin at burial site |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-26-2025, 05:38 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
‘Transgender’ individuals to welcome Pope Francis’ coffin at burial site
As announced by Vatican News, some self-described transgender individuals be included in a welcoming party for Pope Francis’ remains at the Basilica of St. Mary Major.
![[Image: MicrosoftTeams-image.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/MicrosoftTeams-image.png)
Pope Francis meets with transgender activist group at weekly audience
LifeSiteNews
Apr 25, 2025
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews [adapted - not all hyperlinks included from original]) — A party of self-described transgender individuals will form part of a small group welcoming Pope Francis’ body to the Roman basilica where he will be buried on Saturday.
As announced by Vatican News – the in-house news outlet for the Vatican – some gender-confused individuals will be included in a welcoming party for Pope Francis’ remains at the Basilica of St. Mary Major.
A group of of some 40 people were already due to be present outside the basilica on Saturday afternoon in order to form an official welcoming party to the mortal remains of the late pope. This was explained by the Holy See Press Office as being reflective of the pope’s attention to the poor during his life.
But a little later, Vatican News quoted the words of one of Rome’s auxiliary bishop – Bishop Benoni Ambarus – who gave further details about who would constitute the party.
Ambarus said there will be “a small representation of transsexuals whom I know, whom we follow through a small community of nuns.”
Also present will be some of Rome’s poor, homeless, prisoners, and migrants.
Explaining this, Ambarus said, “There will also be prisoners met at the opening of the Holy Door in Rebibbia [prison]. It is a moving choice, because the Holy Father will be welcomed by the Mother he loved so much and by his beloved children who will surround him.”
“Ideally, it is as if all his beloved people were accompanying him on his last steps,” he added.
The precise details of who will be in the party are not yet public.
Francis is well known for his frequent hosting of transgender groups at the Vatican, along with key transgender activists such as Sister Jeannine Gramick.
Asked about this during a television interview earlier this year, Francis said “Proximity! That’s the word. Proximity to everybody. Everyone.”
Francis’ practicing of “proximity” has included a number of audiences and meetings with individuals actively living as though a member of the opposite sex, or key LGBT activists. He has also welcomed a group of purportedly transgender individuals as VIP guests at his weekly audiences, after Sister Genevieve Jeanningros facilitated the encounter between them and the pontiff.
Participants of these encounters have also recounted how meeting the Pope re-enforced them, rather than awakening them to their biological reality.
One woman, who lives as a man, commented that her meeting confirmed her in her “transgender identity.”
The Catholic Church calls all souls to the practice of chastity, but particular care is given to those suffering with same-sex attraction to offer the assistance needed but also to ensure that the fullness of Catholic morality is not compromised in this endeavor.
Teaching found re-iterated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered” and “contrary to the natural law.” The catechism is very clear that homosexual activity can never be approved, and repeats that “[h]omosexual persons are called to chastity.”
The late pope’s LGBT record infamously began with his 2013 in-flight comments, “Who am I to judge?” when asked about the existence of a gay lobby within the Vatican and the practice of homosexuality. Such support took a marked increase in the wake of the Vatican’s March 2021 responsum condemning same-sex “blessings,” as Francis made numerous public statements praising and supporting advocates of LGBT ideology and same-sex civil unions.
Then in December 2023, he authorized the Declaration Fiducia Supplicans, which contained approval for “blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex.” Written by Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández – prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith – and approved by Francis, the document caused instant and widespread consternation throughout the global Church.
Fiducia Supplicans was swiftly welcomed by LGBT advocates and heterodox clerics, while vocal opposition was found predominantly in Africa along with a steadily growing number of dioceses in the U.S., Europe, the U.K., and among religious orders.
Notable prelates – Cardinals Gerhard Müller and Joseph Zen and Robert Sarah, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Bishop Athanasius Schneider – all penned their rejection of the document’s proposal for same-sex blessings, many doing so repeatedly. Sarah went as far as to state that Fiducia Supplicans proposes a “heresy that gravely undermines the Church, the Body of Christ, because it is contrary to the Catholic faith and tradition.”
Fiducia Supplicans’ publication arguably caused one of the greatest tumults in the Francis pontificate up until that time, with the global backlash against the text on a scale previously unseen in the prior 11 years of Francis’ reign.
LifeSiteNews readers are invited to continue praying for the repose of the soul of Pope Francis.
|
|
|
|
| UK To Greenlight Experiments To "Dim The Sun" In Bid To Stop Global Warming |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-26-2025, 05:32 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
|
UK To Greenlight Experiments To "Dim The Sun" In Bid To Stop Global Warming
ZH [adapted and reformatted] | Apr 24, 2025
It's a project reminiscent of the movie Snowpiercer, in which governments institute a global experiment to spray chemicals into the atmosphere to stop global warming and end up creating a new ice age instead. Once again reality is downstream from fiction as the UK is set to bankroll an experiment to "dim the sun". This goal will be pursued in field trials which could include injecting aerosols into the atmosphere, or brightening clouds to reflect sunshine.
The project is being considered by scientists as a way to prevent "runaway climate change", despite the fact that there is zero evidence to support the claim of runaway climate change.
Aria, the Government’s advanced research and invention funding agency, has set aside £50 million for projects, which will be announced in the coming weeks.
Prof Mark Symes, the program director for Aria (Advanced Research and Invention Agency), said there would be “small controlled outdoor experiments on particular approaches”.
“We will be announcing who we have given funding to in a few weeks and when we do so we will be making clear when any outdoor experiments might be taking place,” he said.
“One of the missing pieces in this debate was physical data from the real world. Models can only tell us so much. Everything we do is going to be safe by design. We’re absolutely committed to responsible research, including responsible outdoor research. We have strong requirements around the length of time experiments can run for and their reversibility and we won’t be funding the release of any toxic substances to the environment.”
One major area of research is Sunlight Reflection Methods (SRM), which includes Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) whereby tiny particles are released into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight. Another potential project is Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB) in which ships would spray sea-salt particles into the sky to enhance the reflectivity of low-lying clouds.
Climate scientists say efforts to reduce carbon emissions are not working fast enough and that levels are "too high", leading to irregular weather patterns and eventually the temperature "tipping point" in which an exponential crisis is created by heat creating carbon and then carbon creating more heat.
The problem is that nothing in this theory is backed by causational evidence or the climate history of the Earth. In other words, climate scientists are siphoning up government grant money to create solutions to a problem that doesn't exist. The vast majority of climate change theories are based on data collected since the 1880s - 140 years of data is a insignificant window of time in the long lifespan of the Earth's climate.
When we look at the temperature data over millions of years, we find that today's temps are near the lowest in our planet's history (we just exited an Ice Age not long ago and climate scientists want us to believe it's too hot)
When comparing millions of years of carbon data to parallel temperature data, it becomes clear that there is no correlation between carbon levels and global warming. This graph also proves that carbon and temperature levels can rise and fall independently of human industry and human industry's effects on these patterns is negligible or non-existent.
There is also no data to prove correlation or causation between carbon emissions and extreme weather patterns. The entirety of the climate change theory is based on lab models with no corresponding examples in nature. It is pure hysteria.
This makes the use of atmospheric manipulation by governments all the more disturbing. If they truly are trying to "dim the sun" for the sake of preventing global warming, then they are doing so based on a delusion. There is also the possibility that they know man-made climate change is nonsense and these experiments serve another purpose. In either case, they should be stopped. No one voted for politicians to blot out the sun (or to find a way to blot out the sun). No one gave them permission to pump particulates or chemicals into the sky. Their actions constitute a radical violation of the public trust.
|
|
|
|
| Holy Mass in New Hampshire - May 11, 2025 [May Crowning] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-25-2025, 07:02 PM - Forum: May 2025
- No Replies
|
|
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Third Sunday after Easter
[May Crowning]
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.catholicconvert.com...7b268becf0]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.catholicconvert.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FQueen-of-Heaven.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=41b8d4a150a110b6a185e1aca1f0317dcbd7f4e70fc1ba57fc0aeb7b268becf0)
Date: Sunday, May 11, 2025
Time: Confessions - 10:00 AM
Holy Mass - 10:30 AM
Location: The Oratory of the Sorrowful Heart of Mary
66 Gove's Lane
Wentworth, NH 03282
Contact: 315-391-7575
sorrowfulheartofmaryoratory@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
| Let us pray for a good pope, unworthy though we may be... |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-24-2025, 05:34 AM - Forum: Appeals for Prayer
- No Replies
|
|
A Holy Hour for the intention of a truly Catholic outcome of the upcoming Conclave is being organized.
This idea was begun in the UK but the invitation is extended to all, so that the prayers of the faithful may, by covering different hours of the day, offer continual petition to the Blessed Trinity for a truly good pope, who will, among other things, perform Our Lady of Fatima's request for the Consecration of Russia.
The intentions of this Holy Hour would also include prayers for the Restoration of the Church in general and for the Resistance and Fr. Hewko's seminary, in particular, which as we know, are one and the same prayer!
Those wishing to formally participate can email at least a first name and selected hour of the day they wish to offer to: contact@thecatacombs.org
|
|
|
|
| Louis Veuillot: The Liberal Illusion [1866] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-24-2025, 05:05 AM - Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
- Replies (40)
|
|
Translated by
Rt. Rev. Msgr. George Barry O’Toole, Ph. D., S. T. D.
Professor of Philosophy in The Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C.
With Biographical Foreword by
Rev. Ignatius Kelly, S. T. D., Professor of Romance Languages in De Sales College, Toledo, Ohio
Of old time thou hast broken my yoke,
thou hast burst my bands, and thou
saidst: I will not serve. — Jer. 2:20.
BIOGRAPHICAL FOREWORD
A PALADIN, and not a mere fighter,” says Paul Claudel of Louis Veuillot. “He fought, not for the pleasure of fighting, but in defense of a holy cause, that of the Holy City and the Temple of God.”
It is just one hundred years ago, 1838, that Louis Veuillot first dedicated himself to this holy cause. “I was at Rome,” he wrote as an old man recalling that dedication. “At the parting of a road, I met God. He beckoned to me, and as I hesitated to follow, He took me by the hand and I was saved. There was nothing else; no sermons, no miracles, no learned debates. A few recollections of my unlettered father, of my untutored mother, of my brother and little sisters.” This was Louis Veuillot’s conversion, the beginning of his apostolate of the pen which was to merit him the title of “Lay Father of the Church” from Leo XIII; “Model of them who fight for sacred causes” from Pius X; and from Jules Le Maitre the epithet “le grand catholique.”
In the days of the Revolution, the maternal grandmother of Veuillot, Marianne Adam, a hatchet in her hand, had defended the cross of the church of Boynes in old Gatinais. “I do nothing more,” said Veuillot, fifty years later. He was born in this same village of Boynes, October 13, 1813, of poor, uneducated parents. A meager elementary education, little religious training, a schoolmaster who distributed dirty novels to his young charges, nothing of these early years would seem to point towards his apostolate of the future. He had reached the age of thirteen, when Providence intervened. Thirteen years old! Time to earn his bread! But by what work? The ambitious mother wanted him to be a lawyer. From his almost meaningless elementary education, he had two helpful assets, sufficient spelling skill and a better than average script. With these recommendations, and with a word from a family friend, Veuillot was accepted as a clerk in the office of a lawyer of Paris, Fortune Delavigne, brother of the poet Casimir, then at the height of his literary glory.
His first work was simple, the pay only thirty francs a month, but there was opportunity to educate himself by his reading and his human contacts. Later on, in the memoirs of his youth, he gave thanks to Heaven for three blessings of his life: poverty, love of work, and an incapacity for debauch. His free time was devoted to reading and reading was learning; books took the place of sleep and no other pleasure took the place of books. He thought of the priesthood and wrote a letter to the Archbishop of Paris, Mgr. de Quelin, asking admission to the Petit Seminaire. Perhaps this wasn’t the proper procedure; perhaps the letter never reached its address; at any rate, there was no reply. The Church lost a probable priest, but gained a sure lay apostle.
The year 1831 is a turning point in his life. Eighteen years of age, assistant chief clerk in the same office, one hundred francs a month salary, Veuillot began to write. Some of his efforts appeared in Le Figaro. Casimir Delavigne praised certain of his poetic attempts and he was thus led to decide on a career in journalism. His first work was with an humble-enough paper, but not without circulation, L’Echo de la Seine-Inf erieure. “Without any preparation,” he says, “I became a journalist.” He went on to other papers in the provinces, “feuilles de chou,” as the Parisians call them, at Rouen, at Perigueux; he formed his hand in this provincial journalism, shaped his mind, and fostered his bent for appraising men and their ideas.
His university was the wide school of clash and contact. But, if he was writing “almost before he had begun to study,” as Sainte-Beuve puts it, his study soon caught up with his trade, and at the age of twenty-five Veuillot gave sign of possessing that depth of view and breadth of culture which are almost without exception the fruit of the university mind. Veuillot was the exception and there was not, as too often there is in the university mind, not even the suspicion of the snob in him.
In 1838, the year of his trip to Rome, Veuillot had scarcely anything soundly Christian about him. His conversion was no different than he had described it, but looking back upon it now, after one hundred years, may we not see it as a great divine grace for Catholic France? The apologists of the “eldest daughter of the Church” were choosing to fence with the enemies of the Cross of Christ, whereas the Church needed, as it always does, not a gilt-edge weapon, but a broad-sword. The champions of ecclesiastical France were of the school of “liberal apologists.”
Veuillot returned to France, a soldier, a missionary, a zealot if you will, but of a zeal which resembles that of a Jerome, an Augustine, a Bernard, a Bossuet, a de Maistre. His contemporaries reproached him for his violence, but his reply swept the ground away: “You need make no effort to persuade me that others are more refined than I. I tremble that others do not possess enough of what I have too vigorously ... I am too ignorant not to be violent; but they lack red blood, hate for a society in which they live, a society where velvet and lace cover up its sins and its corruption. They do not know what is happening in the street; they have never set their feet therein; but I come from it, I was born in it, and more than that, I still live in it.” And he added, “We are willing enough to have the blasphemers save their souls, but in the meantime, we don’t intend to have them imperil the souls of others.”
The 16th of June, 1839, Louis Veuillot made his first contribution to the Univers. It was just a short article, “La Chapelle des Oiseaux,” yet it was the beginning of an association which was to continue through forty-five years, to influence thought and action long after his time. On February 2, 1840, he became a regular contributor and, in 1842, Editor- in-Chief. His first editorial declaration is an exposition of his Catholic program: “In the midst of factions of every sort, we belong only to the Church and to our country. With justice towards all, submissive to the laws of the Church, we reserve our homage and our love to an authority of genuine worth, an authority which will issue from the present anarchy and will make evident that it is of God, marching towards the new destinies of France, with Cross in hand.”
He thought of his journalism as a “metier” to be studied, analyzed, appraised. He knew its deficiencies, but he sensed too its genius. “The talent of the journalist,” he wrote, “is arrow-like swiftness and, above all, clarity. He has only a sheet of white paper and an hour to explain the issue, defeat the adversary, state his opinion; if he says a word which doesn’t move straight to the end, if he pens a phrase which his reader does not understand immediately, he doesn’t appreciate his trade. He must hurry; he must be exact; he must be simple. The pen of the journalist has all the privileges of a racy conversation; he must use them. But no ornaments; above all, no striving after eloquence.”
His journalism was also a mission, a vocation. He thought about it as he knelt before the Blessed Sacrament and he determined early that he must place his tasks above parties, above systems. “A party,” he declared, “is a hatred; a system is a barrier; we want nothing to do with either. We are going to take society as the apostles took it. We are neither of Paul, nor of Cephas; we are of Jesus Christ.” The history of his career bears out the fact that this was his invariable program. Journalist, yes! But a crusader, an apostle as well.
His pen flashed out in defense of the freedom of Christian education. “You will permit us to open our schools, or you will open your prisons for us,” he wrote from the cloisters of Solesmes in a vein that transported Montalembert into enthusiasm. In 1844, he rose to a magnificent defense of the Abbe Combalot, condemned to prison for the crime of lese-Universite. And he in turn, for his hardy defense, was thrown behind the locks of the Conciergerie for three months. In 1850, the Social Question was agitating all of France. “Veuillot shed light upon it from on high,” said Mgr. Roess of Strassbourg, not many years ago. Albert de Mun could write of his social philosophy: “All of Catholic social Action is contained in his words of fire.”
But his social Catholicism was more than a doctrine. It was his very life. “To think that men are my brothers!” he used to ponder. There is beautiful Christian counsel in the letter he addressed to his wife, who was just hiring a new servant: “Make it easy for her to obey, in forcing yourself to possess the virtue of command, which is a virtue of justice, of meekness and of patience. . . . And when you find yourself poorly served, try, before you complain, to realize how you yourself serve God. Then surely your reproaches will be milder and will not wound. It would be a grand thing for us, and for all who are in authority over others, if in our relations with our charges, we should simply be good Christians, if we should simply rid ourselves of the sentiment of our own importance, which makes us proud, imperious, bitter and dissatisfied, as soon as people fail to render us what we think they should.” And he himself practiced this virtue, meekness without weakness, patience without weariness. Those who were close to him, who were associated with him, could not but love him. Son, brother, husband, father, friend, his affections were diversified and enduring. There was in him, says Fortunat Strowski, “le fremissement de la tendresse humaine.”
He was the champion in France of the declaration of the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. His ardor and enthusiasm brought him into conflict with certain members of the hierarchy. Mgr. Dupanloup denounced him vigorously, but the wound was assuaged by Pius IX in a special audience, when the venerable Pontiff assured him that “le cher Univers” had been splendid in this affair, as in every other.
After the war of 1870, Veuillot resumed his apostolate for Church and country. It was under an un-Christian, an un-French leadership that France was marching, and Veuillot was indignant: “I, a Christian,” he cried out, “a Catholic Christian of France, as old in France as its oaks and venerable as they; I, the son of perspiration moistening vine and grain, son of a race which has never ceased giving to France tillers of the soil, soldiers and priests, asking nothing in return but work, the Eucharist and rest in the shadow of the Cross; ... I am made, unmade, governed, ruled, slashed at by vagabonds of mind and morals, men who are neither Christian nor Catholics, and by that very fact, who are not French and who can have no love of France.” “Happy are the dead,” his pen trembled as he wrote the words in 1872, but his faith and courage did not falter long, and the last years of his life found him still the ardent champion of sacred causes. For nearly half a century, he had been fighting for the holy city and the temple. He was worn out by the unceasing combat; his pen moved slowly and finally not at all. His hand could hold only the rosary which had been his companion of the years, he told its beads constantly until the end, which came quietly, calmly April 7, 1883. “Since then,” said M. Barthou a few years ago, “his reputation has not ceased to grow. Rather, we may say of him with his biographer, Frangois Veuillot: “He continues to radiate,” for Louis Veuillot is a flame of truth and devotion, unquenchable because kindled by the divine spark of faith and love for God and country.
Ignatius Kelly, S. T. D.
De Sales College
Feast of the Nativity
December 25, 1938.
|
|
|
|
| Trump admin replaces COVID website with page listing establishment lies on lockdowns, lab leak |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-24-2025, 04:38 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
Trump admin replaces COVID website with page listing establishment lies on lockdowns, lab leak
COVID.gov now redirects to a White House page headlined “LAB LEAK: The True Origins of Covid-19,"
which takes aim at Dr. Fauci, Andrew Cuomo, lockdowns, and more.
Apr 22, 2025
(LifeSiteNews [adapted - not all hyperlinks included from original]) – The Trump administration has replaced the Biden administration’s dedicated COVID-19 resource website with a White House landing page detailing several of the most prominent falsehoods previously promoted by the medical establishment, including about lockdowns and the true origins of the virus.
Whereas covid.gov previously displayed resources such as vaccine recommendations, treatment recommendations, local testing locations, and pitches to wear face masks, the web address now redirects to a White House page headlined “LAB LEAK: The True Origins of Covid-19.”
The new page is based largely on the U.S. House Oversight & Accountability Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic’s December 2024 After Action Review on COVID-19 and the government response. That report affirmed the verdict that COVID most likely originated in a lab through gain-of-function research and broadly condemned the lockdowns of personal freedom and economic activity but attempted to walk a far finer and sometimes contradictory line on the COVID vaccines, which President Donald Trump has been reluctant to disavow.
Accordingly, the page provides an overview of the medical establishment’s initial attempt to discredit the possibility of COVID originating in a lab (and by extension their own culpability in releasing it), condemns former President Joe Biden’s pardon of former White House COVID czar Dr. Anthony Fauci, highlights former New York Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s culpability in nursing home deaths due to his pandemic decisions, notes “social distancing” was “arbitrary and not based on science,” and says there was “no conclusive evidence that masks effectively protected Americans from COVID-19” while omitting any discussion of the vaccines.
“Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency,” the new page summarizes. “Most egregiously, the federal government demonized alternative treatments and disfavored narratives, such as the lab leak theory, in a shameful effort to coerce and control the American people’s health decisions. When those efforts failed, the Biden Administration resorted to ‘outright censorship — coercing and colluding with the world’s largest social media companies to censor all COVID-19-related dissent.’”
Nearly every major position asserted as fact during the height of the COVID pandemic has since been determined to be fatally flawed. A large body of evidence has found that mass restrictions on personal and economic activity undertaken in 2020 and part of 2021 caused far more harm than good in terms of personal freedom and economics as well as public health, and that lives could have been saved through far less burdensome methods, such as the promotion of established therapeutic drugs, narrower protections focused on those most at risk (such as the elderly and infirm), and increasing vitamin D intake.
In Florida, the first report by a grand jury impaneled by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis determined that lockdowns did more harm than good, that masks were ineffective at stopping COVID transmission, that COVID was “statistically almost harmless” to children and most adults, and that it is “highly likely” that COVID hospitalization numbers were inflated.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has called America’s COVID response one of “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country,” against which Congress, state legislatures, and courts alike were largely negligent to protect constitutional rights, personal liberty, and the rule of law.
As for the COVID shots, which were developed in record time by the first Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed initiative, the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 38,541 deaths, 220,494 hospitalizations, 22,247 heart attacks, and 28,908 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of March 28, among other ailments. U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) CDC researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.
An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published in the journal Vaccine “observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses” of mRNA-based COVID vaccines, as well as signs of increased risk of “pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” and other “potential safety signals that require further investigation.” In April 2024, the CDC was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions, and a study out of Japan found “statistically significant increases” in cancer deaths after third doses of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines and offered several theories for a causal link.
In January, a long-awaited Florida grand jury report on the COVID vaccine manufacturers found that while only a miniscule percentage of the millions of vaccinations resulted in serious harm based on the data it had access to, such events do occur, and there are “profound and serious issues” in pharmaceutical companies’ review process, including reluctance to share what evidence of adverse events they did find.
All eyes are currently on Trump and his health team, helmed by Robert F. Kennedy as Secretary of Health & Human Services (HHS). As one of the country’s most vocal critics of the COVID establishment and vaccines more generally, his nomination brought hope that the second Trump administration will take a critical reassessment of the shots that the returning president has previously embraced, although most of Kennedy’s comments since joining Trump have focused on other issues, such as conventional vaccines and harmful food additives, and during confirmation hearings he called Operation Warp Speed an “extraordinary accomplishment.”
Trump has given mixed signals as to the prospects of reconsidering the shots and has nominated both critics and defenders of establishment COVID measures for a number of administration roles.
The CDC and U.S. Food & Drug Administration websites’ COVID-19 pages are still active, along with recommendations to vaccinate. The HHS website also has various COVID-related content, although some items, such as the “Let’s Get Real” page about vaccinating children for the virus, appear to have been taken down.
|
|
|
|
| WHO Finalizes Pandemic Treaty |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-24-2025, 04:32 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
WHO Finalizes Pandemic Treaty
![[Image: WHO-logo.png]](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/WHO-logo.png)
AE [slightly adapted and reformatted] | Apr 23, 2025
The World Health Organization (WHO) has been scheming to finalize the Pandemic Treaty to ensure global cohesion during the next pandemic. Over 190 member nations have agreed to surrender sovereignty in the name of public health, permitting an unelected organization of individuals to detail how they will respond to the next round of government imposed biological warfare.
WHO Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who is not a medical doctor but a Klaus Schwab appointee, declared this as a global victory. Interestingly, Schwab resigned as soon as the treaty was finalized. “The nations of the world made history in Geneva today,” Tedros declared. “In reaching consensus on the Pandemic Agreement, not only did they put in place a generational accord to make the world safer, they have also demonstrated that multilateralism is alive and well, and that in our divided world, nations can still work together to find common ground, and a shared response to shared threats.
![[Image: Schwab-and-Tedros-WHO.jpg?resize=600,502]](https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Schwab-and-Tedros-WHO.jpg?resize=600,502)
Schwab and Tedros WHO
The One Health approach defines this treaty, which vaguely recognizes that all life on this planet is connected and therefore, under their rationale, requires a unified approach to problems. The WHO cooperates with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) to form the “Quadripartite” partnership that aims to promote the One Health agenda. The One Health High-Level Expert Panel (OHHLEP), controlled by the WHO, provides “the science” to guide all mandates.
This treaty provides a group of unelected officials with immense power. There are new financial terms outlined under the new treaty. Manufacturers producing pandemic-related products now must allocate 10% of production to the WHO at no cost, and they must deduce costs by 10% for the WHO as well. Members already pay annual fees to the WHO, but they will now be required to pool funding into a centralized financial mechanism (CFM).
Governments and international organizations will be expected to pay into the CFM. Developed nations will be forced to pay for others as each member has “common but differentiated responsibilities” based on GDP. However, there are discussions that private entities may also be forced to pay to ensure financial preparedness. The funds will be allocated at the direction of the unelected officials at the Quadripartite.
The WHO ensured that there was no transparency during COVID-19. The organization continually protected China at the direction of the Chinese Communist Party, despite the United States being the top donor to the organization. The White House has finally dispelled the COVID narrative perpetuated by “the science” and unelected organizations. They can and will do this again.
As noted by the White House:
Social Distancing: The “6 feet apart” social distancing recommendation — which shut down schools and small business across the country — was arbitrary and not based on science. During closed door testimony, Dr. Fauci testified that the guidance “sort of just appeared.”
Mask Mandates: There was no conclusive evidence that masks effectively protected Americans from COVID-19. Public health officials flipped-flopped on the efficacy of masks without providing Americans scientific data — causing a massive uptick in public distrust.
Lockdowns: Prolonged lockdowns caused immeasurable harm to not only the American economy, but also to the mental and physical health of Americans, with a particularly negative effect on younger citizens. Rather than prioritizing the protection of the most vulnerable populations, federal and state government policies forced millions of Americans to forgo crucial elements of a healthy and financially sound life.
The World Health Organization: The WHO’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic was an abject failure because it caved to pressure from the Chinese Communist Party and placed China’s political interests ahead of its international duties. Further, the WHO’s newest effort to solve the problems exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic — via a “Pandemic Treaty” — may harm the United States.
COVID-19 Misinformation: Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency. Most egregiously, the federal government demonized alternative treatments and disfavored narratives, such as the lab leak theory, in a shameful effort to coerce and control the American people’s health decisions.
When those efforts failed, the Biden Administration resorted to “outright censorship—coercing and colluding with the world’s largest social media companies to censor all COVID-19-related dissent.”
Rumble Video of RFK Jr. discussing Event 201
Not a single person has been held responsible for one of the worst humanitarian crises in history. The now former chair of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, repeatedly stated that the pandemic would provide an opportunity for a Great Reset where one global entity will reign supreme. The WEF partnered with Bill Gates to co-host EVENT 201—a mock trial for the COVID-19 pandemic, one year before it began. The world is a stage, and we are the puppets that they control. The WHO was not directly involved in Event 201; however, Bill Gates is now the WHO’s primary donor, following the US’s departure.
The WHO requires a 12-month waiting period before a country can formally be removed from the alliance under the WHO Constitution. Donald Trump withdrew on January 20, 2025, with WHO membership officially ending on January 23, 2026. The disease cycle has honed in on 2026 as a major event. I am not saying that Disease X, the next pandemic outlined by the WHO, will occur before that timeframe, but the correlations are undeniable.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: poster-st.louismarie22__60170.1648058865.jpg?c=2]](https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-hr2lb/images/stencil/1280x1280/products/331/2240/poster-st.louismarie22__60170.1648058865.jpg?c=2)
![[Image: Snowpiercer1.jpg?itok=7lmlANq3]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/inline-images/Snowpiercer1.jpg?itok=7lmlANq3)
![[Image: Global%20Temp%20History1_8.png?itok=y54ZTSWd]](https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/Global%20Temp%20History1_8.png?itok=y54ZTSWd)
![[Image: ClimateFraud1_0.png?itok=IyUDCO0H]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/inline-images/ClimateFraud1_0.png?itok=IyUDCO0H)
![[Image: 2023-11-26_14-09-58_4.jpg?itok=1YR4dgT7]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/inline-images/2023-11-26_14-09-58_4.jpg?itok=1YR4dgT7)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-8t...a90077fabe]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-8tjBIQ1cSGo%2FT_JmE-Q7goI%2FAAAAAAAAFYA%2FOl9sqeEpT68%2Fs1600%2FGhent%2BAltarpiece%2BPopes%2Band%2BBishops.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=fbb8eb4793ab14ecc3524ca6611ba7c207008ed029b66878649846a90077fabe)
