All articles from July 20, 2021


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

  • Nothing is published in Video on July 20, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on July 20, 2021.

News

Sean Hannity uses his Fox News show to push COVID vaccination

One of the network’s medical experts appeared to scold a student who had an adverse reaction to a different vaccine for following medical advice not to take a coronavirus shot.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 8:40 pm EST
Featured Image
Fox News host Sean Hannity promotes the coronavirus vaccine on his show.
Matt Lamb
By

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Conservative FOX News host Sean Hannity devoted a recent segment of his show to begging people to take a COVID-19 vaccine despite having a guest on who had a medical condition precipitated by a different vaccine.

“I believe in the science of vaccination,” Hannity said during his show on Monday night after criticizing a decision by a federal judge to allow a coronavirus vaccine mandate at Indiana University.

“Just like we’ve been saying, please take COVID seriously,” Hannity said. 

“You also have a right to medical privacy, and doctor-patient confidentiality is also important,” Hannity said before imploring viewers to take the experimental shot.

“And it absolutely makes sense for many Americans to get vaccinated. I believe in science, I believe in the science of vaccination.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Hannity then had Olivia Sandor on his show. The recent high school graduate will no longer attend Brigham Young University in Hawaii after the Mormon college denied her request for a medical exemption from its coronavirus vaccine mandate.

As LifeSiteNews previously reported, Sandor “suffers from Guillain-Barre syndrome, an autoimmune disease affecting the nervous system, which can be triggered by vaccination.”

After hearing Sandor share her story, Fox News medical analyst Nicole Saphier appeared to criticize her for deciding not to get vaccinated, despite the fact that Guillain-Barre syndrome can be a side effect of at least one coronavirus vaccine on the market (Johnson & Johnson), according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Hannity introduced Dr. Saphier by noting that she, too, is “pro-science” and “pro-vaccine science.”

“I would say for Olivia, while I understand the impetus behind not wanting to get vaccinated, as long as she continues to protect herself,” Saphier said, she should be OK. She then added that Sandor should also be worried about getting the coronavirus. 

Saphier then explained that she did not know of any current coronavirus vaccines causing Guillain-Barre Syndrome but did appear to defend Sandor’s decision.

Hannity said that he talked to someone at BYU-Hawaii who said university officials only have the requirement because it’s a state rule. 

That claim appears dubious since the public University of Hawaii withdrew its own vaccine requirement.

Jenna Ellis, a legal adviser to former President Donald Trump, questioned why Fox News had begun pushing vaccination.

“Why are multiple Fox hosts suddenly devoting entire segments today begging people to take the vaccine?” Ellis wrote on Twitter. “You’d think the Murdochs just acquired Pfizer.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 

RELATED:

FDA officially adds warning of neurological condition to Johnson & Johnson vaccine
Biden: Government agents will go ‘door to door’ to get ‘remaining’ Americans vaccinated Father of 3 refused kidney transplant unless he takes experimental coronavirus vaccine
Eminent doctor: COVID vaccine is ‘bioterrorism by injection’ and has likely caused at least 50K deaths in the US


  brigham young university-hawaii, coronavirus vaccines, fox news, guillain-barre syndrome, jenna ellis, johnson & johnson, nicole saphier, olivia sandor, sean hannity

News

Head of Canadian civil liberties group who called for churches to ‘burn’ resigns after public outcry

The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association board of directors praised Harsha Walia for stepping down despite her tweet that supported violent acts.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 7:19 pm EST
Featured Image
Harsha Walia is executive director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association. YouTube
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The head of a Canadian civil group who called for Catholic churches to be burned “down” in late June resigned from her job after an outcry.  

In a statement posted last Friday, the board of directors for the British Columbia (B.C.) Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) announced they accepted the resignation of Harsha Walia, who served as its executive director.  

The BCCLA Board heavily praised Walia for “her bold, skillful, and compassionate leadership” at the organization in the statement about her resignation.  

Walia recently sparked online fury after openly calling for violence against Catholic parishes, writing on Twitter in response to news of Catholic churches being torched to “Burn it all down.”  

She tweeted in response to the discovery of unmarked graves at now-closed indigenous residential schools once run by the church.   

According to a Global News report, shortly after her “burn it all down” tweet, Walia tweeted that it was “totally ridiculous to suggest I am actively calling for arson,” adding that “yes, I do think deadly genocidal colonialism locally and globally needs to collapse.”   

There has been heavy media coverage of the discovery of unmarked graves at now-closed residential schools once run by the Church in parts of Canada. Forty-seven churches, most of them Catholic, have either been burned or vandalized.   

An online map posted by True North News shows the locations of the churches. 

In a separate statement regarding Walia’s resignation, BCCLA president David Fai wrote that the organization regrets the “misunderstanding that was caused by the tweet and apologizes for the harm the words caused.”  

“Words matter. Context matters. The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association supports the cherished right to free expression, and as an organization we want our messages to be clear. A tweet by our executive director on her personal account failed in that regard,” Fai wrote.  

Fai claimed that Walia’s “Burn it all down” quote resulted in large amounts of “hateful commentary” directed at her that he said was “fueled by the fact that our executive director is a racialized woman leader.” 

He defended Walia’s comments, claiming earlier they were not to “be taken literally but were a recognition that the system that created residential schools is so flawed that we need ‘to burn it all down’ and start over.”  

Many took to social media to show their disbelief that the head of a well-known organization would call for destruction after his tweet went viral.  

Walia’s words received condemnation from B.C. Minister of Public Safety Mike Farnworth, who said they were “disgusting and reprehensible” and would not bring about “reconciliation.” 

On an appearance with FOX News host Tucker Carlson, Rebel News founder Ezra Levant said the multitude of arson attacks on churches in Canada is the nation’s “Black Lives Matter” moment and called out the near silence regarding the burnings from the nation’s top leaders. 

Carlson noted that “all of a sudden Canada looks a lot like the Soviet Union,” before his interview with Levant.  

“Seems like we're exaggerating a little bit? Well, they're burning Catholic and Anglican churches in recent days. Leftist groups are. But Canada's leaders aren't condemning the burning of churches. No, they're endorsing the burning of churches,” he continued. 

Canadian lawyer Naomi Sayers came to the defense of Walia, saying publicly that she would help “burn” down Catholic churches, as well as offering to help defend anyone caught attempting arson. 

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau waited weeks before acknowledging the church vandalism, and when he did speak, he said it is “understandable” that churches have been burned, also saying it is “unacceptable and wrong.”  

In early July, Gerald Butts, a former adviser and close friend to Trudeau, was called out for saying the recent rash of arson and vandalism attacks on mostly Catholic churches are “understandable.” 

Although the residential school system was founded by the secular government in the 19th century and then woefully underfunded by the state -- and although different religious groups were asked to run the schools -- the Catholic Church has borne the brunt of recent criticism. 

Catholic author Michael O’Brien, who attended residential schools and presented testimony to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, previously told LifeSiteNews that the chief underlying issue in the residential school saga was the institutional abuse of children by removing them from their families by the state authorities and then taken to the schools, noting the “long-term psychological and social effects of this.” 

Furthermore, residential schools were severely underfunded, meaning that children did not receive sufficient medical care. These children often suffered from excessively high rates of tuberculosis. From 1910 through 1920, child mortality rates were consistently high. Additionally, the Department of Indian Affairs often refused to ship home the bodies of children who died at the government-mandated schools, meaning they were frequently buried on site.


  arson, british columbia civil liberties association, catholic churches, david fai, harsha walia, justin trudeau, naomi sayers, residential schools, twitter

News

Boris Johnson announces vaccine passports in UK: ‘Proof of a negative test will no longer be sufficient’

Vaccine passports for nightclubs and ‘venues where large crowds gather’ will be strongly encouraged.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 6:35 pm EST
Featured Image
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson Shutterstock
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow Michael
By Michael Haynes

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 

LONDON, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – On the much anticipated “freedom day” when the majority of COVID-19 restrictions expired, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that vaccine passports would be required from the end of September in order to gain access to nightclubs and “other venues” where “large crowds gather.” 

At a press conference on Monday, July 19, Johnson addressed the subject of the COVID-19 experimental injections in the younger age groups. He stated that 35 percent of those ages 18 through 30, which includes approximately 3 million people, were as yet unvaccinated.  

“We need even more young adults to receive a protection that is of immense benefit to your family and friends – and to yourselves,” Johnson declared before issuing a veiled threat against the unvaccinated’s future in society.  

“I would remind everybody that some of life’s most important pleasures and opportunities are likely to be increasingly dependent on vaccination.” 

The 57-year-old Prime Minister next addressed what he saw as a potential “risk” of infections, namely nightclubs, which reopened their doors for the first time since the first national COVID-19 lockdown began March 23, 2020.  

Among the other changes on the already delayed “freedom day” was the removal of the legal requirement to wear face masks indoors, and social distancing rules also being removed. In the place of rules, people will be strongly encouraged to continue with the COVID-19 preventive measures, but not legally obliged to do so.  

However, Johnson declared that in order for him to rule out closing nightclubs in the future, such venues should “do the socially responsible thing and make use of the NHS Covid Pass which shows proof of vaccination, a recent negative test or natural immunity – as a means of entry.” 

Moments later, he stipulated that a negative COVID-19 test would not suffice for entrance to such a venue: “Proof of a negative test will no longer be sufficient.” 

He defended the move by stating that at that time all people over age 18 would have been offered the chance to be “double-jabbed,” and hence the U.K. government is “planning to make full vaccination the condition of entry to nightclubs and other venues where large crowds gather.” 

Johnson reiterated how the government reserves “the right to mandate certification at any point, if it is necessary to reduce transmission,” before couching his threat in the form of a desire to return to pre-COVID normality. “Let me stress – we want people to be able to take back their freedoms as they can today,” he said. 

“We want this country to be able to enjoy the fruits of our massive vaccination campaign. But to do that we must remain cautious and we must continue to get vaccinated.” 

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Instant backlash: ‘It’s about coercing the young’ 

The announcement, made on the day that large swaths of the country had anticipated as the most significant move toward a return to normality since the start of restrictions in March 2020 and on the day that venues such as nightclubs opened, has unsurprisingly sparked outrage.  

One former barrister commented on Twitter that vaccine passports “are an attack on us all.”  

“They are digital IDs for the vaccinated,” wrote Laura Perrins. “They are a system of discrimination and vaccine coercion for the unvaccinated. They must be opposed.” 

Ollie Harfield, a professional footballer (soccer player) in southwest England, described the move as having “NOTHING to do with health. All about CONTROL!!!!” 

Meanwhile, Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch that has opposed the introduction of vaccine certification, spoke to the BBC, calling it “counterproductive.”  

“This is discriminatory and it’s deeply illiberal,” she added. Carlo’s organization is currently crowd-funding to raise funds for the legal battle against vaccine passports, which she described as the “road to a two-tier, checkpoint society driven by discrimination.” 

She was echoed by Sacha Lord, a prominent anti-lockdown commentator online and the night-time economy adviser for Greater Manchester. Declaring he was “deeply concerned by the discriminatory nature for those who either can’t have the vaccine for medical reasons or age, or who don’t want to,” Lord noted how the list of places where vaccine passports could be forced by the government was “endless.” 

Gareth Icke, the son of veteran journalist David Icke, who was banned by Twitter for his vocal opposition to lockdowns, pointed to the element of coercion in the announcement: “Notice you won’t need a stab ID to go to a bingo hall. Nothing to do with protecting the elderly and vulnerable. This Gov has spent 18 months culling them. It’s about coercing the young. Nothing more. Time to be brave.” 

Meanwhile, MP Mark Harper, the chair of the Covid Recovery Group of Conservative backbenchers, attacked the government for “effectively moving to compulsory vaccination.” 

Their concerns have been previously bolstered by a dire warning from Dr. Michael Yeadon, the former VP of vaccine maker Pfizer. Yeadon wrote that “you MUST object and find ways to prevent a vaccine passport system from coming into being. By any and all means necessary.” 

Yeadon stated that the “potential for utterly totalitarian control of the entire population forever lies like a worm at the center of this beyond-Orwellian future.” 

Endless duplicity 

The U.K. Conservative government, led by Johnson, has spent the last eight months giving mixed and often contradictory signals over the introduction of vaccine passports. In December 2020, vaccine minister Nadhim Zahawi said twice that “we have no plans to introduce so-called vaccine passporting,” adding that he urged businesses “not to even think about that.” However, in January the government finally admitted that it was funding a trial of COVID vaccination passports, with £450,000 awarded to eight companies. 

The Ada Lovelace Institute has compiled extensive research to show that the U.K. had been in the process of implementing such passports since the spring of 2020, shortly after the onset of COVID restrictions. The institute noted that “Public Health England’s draft contact tracing operating model, as of 23 April 2020, explicitly identified immunity risk certification as the sixth pillar of the U.K. Government’s contact tracing plan.” 

In May, the U.K. government subsequently introduced a way to demonstrate one’s vaccination status when traveling despite the warnings of human rights campaigners.  

Indeed, all such vaccine passports schemes are in direct opposition to Zahawi’s December 2020 statements, as well as a “damning” report by the influential Parliamentary Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, after a public consultation over vaccine passports. The Committee decided that such a scheme would “by its very nature be discriminatory.” 

“The Committee finds that there is no justification for engaging in what is likely to be a significant infringement of individual rights by introducing a Covid-status certification system, and given the absence of convincing scientific case and the large number of uncertainties that remain, we recommend that the Government abandon the idea of using a Covidstatus [sic] certification system domestically,” he said. 

Aside from any ethical issues, the Committee warned of the “data protection and security risks” of such a plan and described the Government’s implementation of vaccine passport for international travel, as “contempt” of Parliament and the Committee. 

The report and recommendations of the Committee would appear to have been completely ignored by Johnson, who appears determined to make good on his commitment to the G7 Summit to “lead the way” in a worldwide effort to implement an internationally recognized COVID vaccine passport scheme. 

Despite Johnson’s order for vaccine passports to be used in venues where “large crowds gather” in his latest announcement, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the speaker of the House of Commons, revealed that there was no plan to implement vaccine passports in the House of Commons, where the 650 MPs sit. 

Greece just announced that people who haven’t received an experimental, abortion-tainted coronavirus vaccine are now barred from indoor restaurants, bars, cafes, and movie theaters. France has unveiled a “sanitary pass” that means unvaccinated people, in order to participate in regular life, will have to be tested for the coronavirus every two days. 


  boris johnson, covid-19, facemasks, freedom day, nightclubs, uk lockdowns, vaccine passports

News

17 states defend Arkansas law banning child ‘sex changes’ and puberty blockers

'Like Arkansas, amici are concerned about the surge in recent years of children suffering from gender dysphoria and other forms of gender-related psychological distress; the question is how to help them.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 4:53 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Seventeen states are backing an Arkansas law that bans experimental, life-threatening transgender procedures for children and adolescents. 

A coalition of state attorneys general, led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, filed an amicus brief last week in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, arguing that “Arkansas was well within its right to prohibit such experimentation on children.” 

Arkansas lawmakers enacted the Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act in April, prohibiting medical professionals from providing puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, or “sex change” surgeries to gender-confused minors. The far-left nonprofit American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued Arkansas the following month to block the law in Brandt v. Rutledge.  

Along with Marshall, the attorneys general of Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas joined the friend-of-the-court brief in support of the SAFE Act. 

“Like Arkansas, amici are concerned about the surge in recent years of children suffering from gender dysphoria and other forms of gender-related psychological distress,” the brief stated, adding that “these vulnerable children are suffering greatly and need help.” 

“The question is how to help them.” 

“Spend just a little time with the scientific literature in this field and a few things become abundantly clear: the science in this area is largely unsettled; nearly everyone agrees that far more research is needed; and the currently popular approach to care in the United States is not supported by well-researched, evidence-based studies,” the document continued. 

The Republican attorneys general noted that while the vast majority of minors grow out of gender dysphoria naturally, research indicates that virtually all those who start puberty blockers advance to cross-sex hormones and other irreversible interventions, like mutilating surgeries.  

Complications from the practices include “infertility, loss of sexual function, increased risk of heart attacks and strokes, bone-density problems, risk of altered brain development, social risks from delayed puberty, and mental health concerns,” the amicus brief said.  

“Sadly, but for the ‘gender-affirming’ ‘care’ they received … most of these children would neither suffer from gender dysphoria nor from lifelong medical harm as adults.” 

The brief also pointed to recent decisions by hospitals in United Kingdom, Finland, and Sweden to sideline transgender drugs and surgeries for minors, amid growing awareness of the lack of evidence for the practices. 

“As far as minors are concerned, there are no medical treatment[s] that can be considered evidence-based,” the Council for Choices in Healthcare in Finland acknowledged last June.  

The Finnish council stressed that a minor subjected to “gender transitioning” must understand “the reality of a lifelong commitment to medical therapy” and “the permanence of the effects” of the procedures. “Although patients may experience regret, after reassignment treatments, there is no going back to the non-reassigned body and its normal functions.” 

“There is very little reason to think that a child in early adolescence can properly weigh these lifetime risks,” the attorneys generals argued, “particularly when the popular narrative and many doctors … so distort what the evidence shows regarding the possible benefits of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgical interventions.” 

They highlighted the “heartbreaking” stories of detransitioners – individuals who come to regret their “transitions” – like testimony included in a lawsuit that led the U.K.’s High Court of Justice to ban transgender drugs for most minors last year:  

It is only until recently that I have started to think about having children and if that is ever a possibility, I have to live with the fact that I will not be able to breastfeed my children. I still do not believe that I have fully processed the surgical procedure that I had to remove my breasts and how major it really was. I made a brash decision as a teenager, (as a lot of teenagers do) trying to find confidence and happiness, except now the rest of my life will be negatively affected. I cannot reverse any of the physical, mental or legal changes that I went through. Transition was a very temporary, superficial fix for a very complex identity issue.  

“Plaintiffs and their amici prefer to ignore these stories and needs, promising instead that hormonal and surgical interventions for gender dysphoric youth are medically necessary and safe,” the attorneys general said. 

“With the stakes so high, the harms so great, and the known benefits so paltry, the Arkansas legislature did not have to embrace an experimental path in lieu of the one that has served the medical profession so well for so long: First, do no harm.” 


  arkansas, children, lawsuits, lgbt, puberty blockers, safe act, sex reassignment surgery, steve marshall, transitioning minors

News

In France, hundreds of thousands protest against new sanitary pass, vaccine regime

Among the slogans that flourished on Saturday in so many French towns, 'Macron, step down!' was a major hit. Home-made placards talked about tyranny, the 'Nazitary pass,' and the defense of 'our rights.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 4:45 pm EST
Featured Image
French protestors against the 'sanitary pass' and mandatory coronavirus vaccination Le Salon Beige
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Follow Jeanne
By Jeanne Smits

ANALYSIS

FRANCE, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in several hundred locations in France on Saturday afternoon to demonstrate against the government’s intention to set up compulsory COVID-19 “vaccination” and COVID-19 status rules obliging all citizens to show a QR-code sanitary pass every time they go to a large shopping center, a restaurant, a café, a bar, a cinema, a theater, a hospital, cultural and leisure venues receiving more than 50 visitors, or want to use long-distance public transport.

The turnout was remarkable, given that on a Saturday in the middle of July, vacations are in full swing and many families are on the road, on their way to their yearly holiday in the country, the mountains, or at the beach.

Chanting “Liberté, Liberté!” from Nice in the far south to Lille way up north in just about all the provincial and departmental capitals all over France – and other towns besides – crowds of people of all social categories rubbed shoulders in full agreement over the iniquity of a law they want to see struck down. The vaccinated were welcome; the idea was not so much, at this point, to underscore the dangers of the experimental “vaccine,” as to fight the setting up of a fractured society with discrimination on an unprecedented scale, where people are being “blackmailed” to receive an experimental injection whose medium- and long-term effects are totally unknown.

All this in the name of the so-called “Delta” variant of SARS-CoV-2 which is more contagious, but much less severe than the already not-so-deadly original form of the disease.

According to official Interior ministry numbers quoted without question by the mainstream media, only about 110,000 people joined the peaceful marches throughout the country. State TV even said “several thousand people.” This is nonsense. Photos of just one of the three demonstrations that took place in Paris show that the one organized by Florian Philippot, leader of Les Patriotes, and joined by Fabrice Di Vizio, who is set to initiate proceedings this Tuesday to prove that the sanitary pass is illegal, showed a crowd larger than that.

Only a handful of political leaders took part, such as Martine Wonner, member of the National Assembly and a former representative of Macron’s “La République en Marche” party. She is one of the most outspoken anti-COVID tyranny voices in the French Parliament.

There were protests in major towns such as Marseille, Nice, Lyon, and Strtasbourg.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

In Bordeaux, where the rally had been banned by the local authorities, 1,200 people (according to the police who notoriously underestimate the numbers) still turned out to decry Macron’s “dictatorship.” In every town turn-outs were impressive, with dense crowds of thousands even in the smaller venues.

I joined the demonstration in Vannes, a medium-sized town (to French standards) of some 53,000 inhabitants on the south coast of Brittany, where the local mainstream press, impressed by the density of the march, spoke of a crowd of “3,500.” My personal count would be closer to 5,000: an assembly of rich and poor, old and young, traditional families and libertarian Bretons, but mostly “ordinary” folk from all political horizons – even the “Gilet jaunes” or yellow vest movement that rose in October 2018 in protest against the rise of the cost of energy and the growing poverty of the lower and middle classes.

The very diversity of the march should be food for thought for the government that has managed to arm an opposition where natural opposites march together with a single aim. And the mobilization of the “Gilets jaunes” is a sign that the movement has every chance of becoming a fixture with recurrent demonstrations. The only question now is whether the police forces will deal with them as violently and aggressively as they did with the original manifestations three years ago.

In a particularly aggressive move against those who want their bodily integrity and their freedom of movement and other fundamental liberties to be upheld, the government’s spokesman Gabriel Attal stated on BFMTV, a groveling pro-Macron news station:

There is a hard-working and proactive France, which wants to put the virus to one side and work. It is in the majority. And then there is a capricious and defeatist fringe, very much in the minority, which would be satisfied with remaining in chaos and inactivity.

Such a statement is a slap in the face of the 30 million French citizens who to date, are continuing to refuse the COVID “vaccine” and who are afraid for their health, their livelihoods, and the very future of society.

Among the slogans that flourished on Saturday in so many French towns, “Macron, step down!” was a major hit. Home-made placards talked about tyranny, the “Nazitary pass” and the defense of “our rights.” A placard in English read: “International community, please help us to stop Macron’s dictatorship.” Yet another said: “Bravo Macron, Xi Jinping would have done no better.” “Macron, you’re the virus.” “No apartheid,” said others.

Le Salon beige, a Catholic conservative news site, chose a picture showing a placard with the words: “‘My body, my choice. Does that only work for babies that aren’t wanted?” Many other images and videos showing a selection of rallies all over France are available here.

But of all the many, varied themes and catchphrases, the mainstream press focused massively on sparse occurrences of demonstrators wearing the yellow star imposed by the Nazis on Jews, “virtuously” decrying the use of the symbol by people who are being officially depicted as lazy, ignorant, and egoistic good-for-nothings.

Yes, many of the people who took to the streets are angry about the restrictions to their leisure activities, and rightly so, because they are part of life: meeting friends, gathering to enjoy a show or a meal together.

But this is not merely a question of being able to benefit from the simple pleasures of ordinary social life. For all health workers and employees in hospitals, homes for the elderly, in the tourism industry, transportation or major shopping centers having a sanitary pass will be compulsory, which amounts to mandatory vaccination. The probable reason French president Emmanuel Macron made the pass and not vaccination mandatory is that such a disposition would have been more difficult to impose in view of existing laws.

Conversations at the march I joined were not about being free to have fun: there were nurses and assistant care-givers who work hard all through the year and who are afraid that they will have to leave their jobs without compensation. Many spoke of fear for their children, others were explaining that they expect being forced to resign from their beloved profession at a time when COVID has pushed the employment market down. Families spoke of members who had accepted the COVID jab just to be free to go on vacation. Others explained how in the French army, enormous pressure has been put on soldiers and officers alike to accept the “vaccine”: some student officers are being forced to choose between resignation and getting the shots; others are being pushed into uninteresting, administrative jobs when they had hoped to join exterior operations.

In another recurring theme, demonstrators exchanged anecdotes about “adverse events” hitting the vaccinated shortly after getting the injection: blood clots, strokes, young women losing their periods and other, sometimes lethal occurrences were quoted as having happened to people directly known to them.

One such case involved the elderly father of a friend of my interlocutor, who recently died of thrombosis one week after being injected with the COVID jab: his death certificate mentioned the cause of death as the “consequence of a vaccinal injection.” But in the large majority of cases, no adverse effects are officially reported, and no autopsies take place.

A large section of the French public is clearly fully conscious of the astounding attack on freedoms and fundamental liberties that is being fast-tracked through the legislative system. Only hours ago, this Monday afternoon, the highest administrative court, the Conseil d’Etat, gave its green light to the sanitary pass law as drafted by the government, making only minor reservations such as the fact that COVID-positive individuals should not be controlled at night.

The Conseil d’Etat also decided that a 45,000 euro fine for shop or restaurant owners tasked with checking their clients’ compliance (that’s about 53,000 dollars), as suggested by the government, was too heavy, and revised it to 1,000 euro (and 9,000 in case of a repeat offense). But this is still a hefty fine for people whose livelihood depends on welcoming their clients; many joined the demonstrations all over France to protest on being used as auxiliary police forces.

On Tuesday, the National Assembly’s special commission will vet the draft law. One day later, the National Assembly will be asked to debate the text which should reach the Senate by Thursday. The government hopes that the procedure will be wrapped up by the end of the week, and that the sanitary pass” will come into effect by August 1.

On July 19, France had 4,151 new “cases” of COVID and twenty (20) deaths attributed to the disease. Meanwhile, in the U.K., some 50,000 new cases and 28 deaths were counted on Sunday. But in the U.K., yesterday was “Freedom Day” with the lifting of almost all restrictions, although vaccine passports will be rolled out for use in nightclubs starting in September.


  coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, emmanuel macron, france, sanitary pass, vaccine passport, vaccine passports

News

GOP congressman slams mask mandate for unvaccinated at Army base

‘Our soldiers should not be intimidated or coerced by the government into taking an experimental shot that has death and other ill-effect risk associated with it.’
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 4:22 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

DALE COUNTY, Alabama, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Republican Rep. Mo Brooks recently appealed to President Joe Biden to repeal Fort Rucker’s order requiring unvaccinated people to wear masks on the Alabama U.S. Army base. 

According to The Birmingham News, the southeast Alabama base’s commanding officer last week published General Order No. 12 , mandating masks for both soldiers and civilians unless they can show proof their vaccination against COVID-19.  

It was alleged that this order is necessary to stop the spread of the supposed “delta” variant, despite scientific evidence that the delta variant has a 99.9+ percent recovery rate.  

In response, Brooks wrote to Biden on Monday, saying, “Our soldiers should not be intimidated or coerced by the government into taking an experimental shot that has death and other ill-effect risk associated with it.” 

Brooks asked Biden to “respect the rights of our military personnel and allow them to make their own informed decisions about their healthcare.” Some are unwilling to receive the experimental vaccines because of the known side effects, which include heart attacks in young men.  

“Defense Department senior leaders have had ‘preliminary discussions’ about making the COVID-19 vaccine mandatory for all U.S. troops once the vaccines receive full approval from the Food and Drug Administration, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby said during a Tuesday afternoon press briefing,” Air Force Times reported July 6

“America’s men and women in uniform fight for the very liberty and freedom Fort Rucker’s leadership denies them. This is un-American,” he wrote.  

“Whether or not to choose to receive a vaccine should be strictly between the patient and doctor after weighing the benefits and risks,” he continued. “Nowhere in the phrase ‘doctor – patient confidentiality’ is the word ‘employer’ included.” 

Brooks explained that the order is discriminatory because “naturally immunized military personnel at Fort Rucker” – soldiers who already contracted and recovered from the Wuhan coronavirus – will still need to wear masks. He also wrote that wearing masks is dangerous for health.  

“Masks have small fibers that regularly loosen and are lodged in users’ lungs. Some masks have inks and dyes which, when consumed by lungs, have unknown cancer and other health risks,” Brooks wrote. 

“Certainly, all or almost all masks reduce oxygen intake into the human body, with all the risks this imposes,” he continued. “There is also the unknown risk that, in the heat and humidity of summers in the South, heat stroke risks increase among mask wearers.” 

Numerous studies have shown that masks are dangerous. Six masks (five worn by children, one by an adult) were sent into a lab at the University of Florida after parents noticed rashes and skin disturbances on the faces of their children.  

The results showed that the masks were a seedbed for harmful bacteria, fungi, and parasites. Another study found that face masks cause children to inhale six times the safe limit of carbon dioxide. 

Furthermore, there is no evidence that masks reduce the spread of COVID-19, and even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has admitted that masks do not work against prolonged exposure to the infected. A panel of renowned doctors recently concluded that “masks don’t work,” but are used to control the populace.  

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 


  coronavirus, covid-19, covid-19 vaccine, fort rucker, joe biden, mo brooks, united states armed forces, us military, vaccine mandates

News

‘Transgender’ people sue Montana over law limiting birth-certificate changes

'When a person is born, you record where they’re born, you record their weight, you record their sex,' state Sen. Carl Glimm responded, 'and that’s important information to document.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 3:31 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Isabella Childs
By Isabella Childs

MISSOULA, Montana, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews)— Two “transgender” people represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit challenging Montana’s new law restricting the ability of “trans” people to change their birth certificates in accordance with their chosen “gender identities.” 

Under Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte’s Senate Bill 280, a “transgender” person must provide a court order with proof of genital surgery to the Department of Public Health and Human Services in order to change the birth sex on the birth certificate. 

Amelia Marquez, a biological male, and “John Doe,” a biological female, claim that the surgery required by the new law is too challenging for some and wrongly requires disclosure of personal information. 

According to the complaint, Marquez, 27, has identified and lived as a female for much of his adulthood and wishes to “correct” his Montana birth certificate to say that he was born female. Marquez has taken female hormones, but is not able to pay for and doesn’t wish to undergo genital surgery. He “lives in fear of having to present [his] birth certificate to someone who may respond negatively or even violently... Marquez is typically perceived as female, so anytime [he] is forced to present an identity document that … identifies [him] as male, [he] is forced to ‘out’ [himself] as transgender.” 

The woman, 22, identifying as John Doe in the complaint “has expressed [her] gender in a traditionally male manner and has lived and identified fully as a male for the last year and a half. [She] has taken hormone therapy for two years and completed masculinizing chest reconstruction surgery,” but doesn’t wish to undergo genital surgery in order to change her birth certificate. She “would like to correct the sex designation on [her] birth certificate to accurately reflect [her] male gender identity but does not wish to be forced to publicly share in court private information and records regarding [her] transgender status, medical treatment and [her] anatomy.” 

The plaintiffs claim that the act is “unconstitutional’ and “was created to marginalize transgender people,” and that in a “free, society the state has no role to play” regarding “gender-affirming surgeries.” 

The plaintiffs’ appeal to Article II, Section 4 of the Montana Constitution states, “No person shall be denied the equal protection of laws.” The plaintiffs claim the law violates this section because it “denies Plaintiffs equal protection of the laws on the basis of their of their gender identity and sex. It discriminates on the basis of gender identity, which is also a form of discrimination on the basis of sex.” 

The plaintiffs also appeal to the due-process clause of Article II, Section 17 that provides that “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,” and Article II, Section 10, which states that individual privacy “shall not be infringed without the showing of a compelling state interest.” 

LGBTQ Nation quoted Republican state Sen. Carl Glimm, who sponsored the new law, as defending it on the grounds that “birth certificates are an item of fact … When a person is born, you record where they’re born, you record their weight, you record their sex. And that’s important information to document.” 

SB 280 is the latest in a series of laws Montana recently enacted to push back on the radical “transgender” movement in the state. House Bill 112 states that participation in school sports at all levels must be based on biological sex. Senate Bill 99 requires schools to notify parents of sex education classes and their right to opt children out of them, and publicly release all sex-ed materials, as well as bars abortion-involved entities from providing sex-ed instruction or resources.

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.


  amelia marquez, american civil liberties union, birth certificates, carl glimm, greg gianforte, lgbt, montana, senate bill 280, transgenderism

News

Greece blocks access to indoor restaurants, bars, cafes, movie theaters, for unvaccinated

The news comes as Greece, France, and the UK imposed vaccine mandates for healthcare workers, with the potential to expand the mandates to broader swaths of the population.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 2:35 pm EST
Featured Image
COVID-19 injection Saratstock/Shutterstock
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow
By

ATHENS, Greece, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Patrons who haven’t received coronavirus vaccines are now barred from indoor restaurants, bars, cafes, and movie theaters in Greece according to new restrictions that took effect in the country Friday. 

According to Reuters, as of Friday “[c]ustomers at indoor restaurants, bars and cafes have to prove they have been vaccinated,” a move which marks “the latest in a series of curbs aimed at saving the summer tourist season and includes foreign tourists.” The restrictions do not apply to outdoor venues. 

The Associated Press noted that access to movie theaters in Greece is likewise restricted, and clarified that diners and movie-goers can alternatively show proof that they have “recently recovered” from COVID-19 if they have not gotten the injection. 

According to protocols defined by the Greek government for travelers, a certificate of recovery from SARS-CoV-2 issued 30 days after a positive COVID-19 test is acceptable proof for up to 180 days after issuance. An authorized PCR test result indicating the individual tested positive for the coronavirus in the past 30 to 180 days may also be considered acceptable proof of recent recovery. 

Meanwhile, Reuters reported the Greek government has launched a national digital vaccine passport app for businesses called COVID FREE GR, which can scan European vaccine passports to check the vaccination status of customers and turn away those who have not gotten the jab.  

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

To date roughly 41 percent of Greeks 15 years old and older are “fully vaccinated.” 

But not all Greeks are in favor of the government’s push to incentivize vaccination by restricting the freedoms of unvaccinated individuals. 

On Wednesday more than 5,000 Greeks gathered in Athens to protest the restrictions and mandates, including the government’s recent move to extend vaccination to minors as young as 15. Some protestors called for Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to resign. 

Protestors also took to the streets in Thessaloniki, Patra, and Crete. According to Neos Kosmos, a national Greek community newspaper headquartered in Australia, protestors waved Greek flags, held wooden crosses, and sang “Christos Anestis” (“Christ has Risen”), an Easter hymn. 

Cardiologist Faidon Vovolis, who leads the Greek “Free Again” movement which opposes mandated face masks and the experimental COVID-19 shots, told Reuters "Every person has the right to choose” whether to receive optional medical interventions. “We're choosing that the government does not choose for us."  

On Saturday, the Greek government took a swipe at its own tourist industry by issuing a ban on music in restaurants and bars and enacting a nighttime curfew on the island of Mykonos, a popular tourist destination.  

Mykonos's Mayor Konstantinos Koukas criticized the measures, which he called "unfair" and "misguided." 

"Mykonos cannot be the only island where music won't be heard,” Koukas wrote on Facebook, according to Reuters. “The only thing this will achieve is that visitors will go to another island.” 

News of the Greek government’s crackdown on unvaccinated residents and tourists, and its imposition of vaccine passports upon citizens seeking to attend dining and entertainment venues, comes amid similar announcements in France and the U.K. 

On July 12, the same day Greece announced it was mandating COVID-19 shots for healthcare professionals and nursing home employees, French president Emmanuel Macron announced a similar mandate which is set to take effect in France in September.  

Macron said while COVID-19 injections were not mandatory for all citizens yet, the requirement for healthcare professionals was only a “first stage.” 

“We must move towards the vaccination of all the French, because it is the only pathway to the return to normal life, Macron claimed. “As a first stage, it will be mandatory for people in the health professions, care-givers or not.” 

“For the millions of you who have not yet been vaccinated, depending on the evolution of the situation we will have to raise the question of compulsory vaccination for all French people.” Macron said. 

France is also set to begin requiring use of a “sanitary pass,” that is, a vaccine passport, for a host of public venues including amusement parks, shows, concerts, and festivals, but extending to smaller spaces as well.  

“Starting in the beginning of August, the sanitary pass will apply to cafés, restaurants, hospitals, rest homes for the elderly and long-distance transportation: airplanes, trains and long-distance buses,” Macron said. 

Government spokesman Gabriel Attal said the sanitary pass requirement will extend to restaurant and cafe terraces, unlike the Greek mandate which permits unvaccinated diners to occupy outdoor spaces without providing proof of vaccination.  

French citizens opposed to what they called a “sanitary dictatorship” took to the streets to protest Macron’s recent announcements. Official estimates, which are likely under-representative, suggested at least 20,000 people participated in the protests in Paris, Lyon, Bordeaux, Toulouse, Bayonne, Avignon, Nantes, and other cities. 

The day after the announcements from France and Greece, the UK also announced it would  force healthcare and “social care” workers in the UK to take one of the experimental COVID-19 injections or lose their jobs.  

The rule is set to take effect in October, with unvaccinated staff members given 16 weeks to receive a full round of the shots. If they fail to do so, they will not be permitted to continue working. 

A spokesman for the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) said employees who refuse “may be asked to find alternative employment that does not involve working in a care home.”  

On Monday, hours after nightclubs were permitted to reopen in England, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that COVID-19 vaccine passports would be mandatory for anyone entering nightclubs or other crowded events. The rule is set to take effect in September, with those who are not “fully vaccinated” barred from entering crowded venues.  

The U.K. has launched its own coronavirus vaccine passport app, NHS COVID Pass, through its National Health Service. Nightclub patrons will have to use the app or another form of certificate to provide proof of vaccination prior to entry. 

“There are a number of reasons to be concerned about vaccine immunity passports, both medical and the risk they pose to our rights and freedoms,” said Ted Kuntz, president of Vaccine Choice Canada (VCC), a not-for-profit society founded by families who have suffered from vaccine reactions or injuries.  

Kuntz told LifeSite in March “there is no medical justification for implementing ‘vaccine immunity passports.’ To do so fails to recognize the limitations of vaccine induced immunity, and the COVID vaccines in particular.” 

Kuntz said vaccine passports are a “violation of our rights and freedoms.” 

“The unstated intention of such a document would be used to restrict access to travel and services of those individuals not partaking in this medical experiment. Such arbitrary restrictions would be a clear violation of our inherent freedoms,” Kuntz said. 

It is unclear what effect vaccine mandates for public venues will have on the economic outlook of the nations which have imposed them, as citizens who choose not to take the experimental shots will stop patronizing venues which require proof of vaccination. 

According to Reuters, amid its 2020 lockdowns Greece's already-challenged economy fell by 8.2 percent last year, while the Wall Street Journal reported that the UK’s economy was in its deepest slump in 300 years in the wake of last year’s restrictions. In France, the national debt skyrocketed last year, rising to 115.7 percent of GDP at the end of 2020, compared with 97.6 percent in 2019. 

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.


  coronavirus, covid-19, covid-19 restrictions, covid-19 vaccine, greece, kyriakos mitsotakis, lockdowns

News

Inventor of mRNA vaccine concerned by stats suggesting COVID surge in most-vaccinated countries

‘In Europe we are seeing surges at many places where most of the population has already been vaccinated. At the same time, the 15 least vaccinated countries don’t seem to face any problem.’
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 1:59 pm EST
Featured Image
Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA technology behind at least two of the experimental COVID-19 gene-therapy vaccines, appearing on a recent Tucker Carlson show. Fox / YouTube
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow Patrick
By Patrick Delaney

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The inventor of the mRNA technology behind at least two of the experimental COVID-19 gene-therapy vaccines expressed grave concern regarding a trend where the most “vaccinated” countries in the world are experiencing surges in COVID-19 cases, while the least vaccinated nations are not.

Dr. Robert Malone, M.D., M.S., an internationally recognized scientist in the areas of virology, immunology and molecular biology, tweeted “This is worrying me quite a bit” while attaching a viral Twitter thread by Corona Realism utilizing the “thread reader” app. 

The Corona Realism presentation, originally in German, summarizes these “really odd” numbers stating, “[i]n Europe we are seeing surges at many places where most of the population has already been vaccinated. At the same time, the 15 least vaccinated countries don‘t seem to face any problem. At some point, denying this problem will get painful.”

The graphs presented reveal how the highly-vaccinated countries of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Malta, have all experienced spikes in cases, while fifteen other low-vaccination nations, have not experienced such spikes.

Then after presenting the following graph of “the 15 most vaccinated countries worldwide,” the tweet thread went on the show the number of COVID cases in each country from the highest to the fifteenth highest, revealing significant spikes in COVID-19 cases in most of the highly “vaccinated” populations.

Image

At the top of the list is the United Arab Emirates ranked at 160 doses per 100 people (from here forward, simply referred to as “doses”) which the report states is experiencing the second largest wave of cases since the pandemic began. 

Image

Malta, with 158.58 doses, has experienced an explosive increase in cases in the past month.

Image
Image

Seychelles, once the most vaccinated country in the world, and at the time of this report ranking third with 141 doses, had one of the highest rates of infection in the world, including about 150 times of those in Germany.

Image

While Iceland did not receive much of a related spike as of yet, Bahrain, with its 128 doses, experienced a significant wave in June, despite a very high vaccination rate.

Image

Israel, with its 126 doses, experienced a large wave after their early rollout began. They are presently facing a fairly rapid increase again with numbers still 6 times higher than Germany which was at 97 doses per 100 people on July 10.

Image

Chile, with its almost 124 doses, endured its two highest peaks when the vaccination was very well advanced, in April and early June. Their case numbers were 20 times higher than Germany on July 10. 

Image

Keeping itself free from oppressive lockdowns for quite some time, Uruguay experienced little problems with COVID-19, until they began their vaccination campaign. They subsequently experienced very high peaks in mid-April and early June. On July 10 they still had about thirty times more cases than Germany.

Image

Mongolia, with its 118 doses, also had no problem with COVID-19 until they began vaccination, and they are still experiencing significant spikes which peaked on June 26. As of July 10, they had about 85 times more cases per capita than Germany.

Image

The United Kingdom with almost 118 doses is experiencing a new peak following high rates of gene-therapy injections, while reports indicate that 47% of all new cases are in the vaccinated.

Image

Qatar also experienced reports of a new peak of COVID cases in mid-April, well into its vaccination campaign, and as of July 10, they had almost six times as many cases as Germany.

Image

While Singapore has extremely low levels of cases, Denmark, with its 100 doses, has had a recent surge following broad uptake of experimental COVID-19 gene-therapy injections, as has the Netherlands.

Image
Image

Finally, and most dramatically, we have the case of Bhutan which went from zero injections to over 60% in just a few days in late March. 

Image

Following these shots, the small landlocked nation in the Eastern Himalayas experienced higher peeks than they had during the pandemic months earlier. 

Image

Last month a trend was noted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as deaths from COVID-19 in the “fully vaccinated,” increased from 160 on April 30 to 535 as of June 1. 

Despite many of these “breakthrough cases” happening regularly, the CDC announced it would only be counting such COVID-19 cases after vaccination that resulted in patients being hospitalized or dying, from May 1 onward, which means it has declined to acknowledge or study 90 percent of vaccine failure cases.

Data released last week from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) VAERS system reported 463,457 total adverse events in the United States following injections of experimental COVID-19 gene therapy vaccines, including 10,991 deaths and 48,385 serious injuries, between Dec. 14, 2020, and July 9, 2021. Such figures are based on voluntary reports to Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), and the Harvard Pilgrim study found that under 1% of adverse effects from vaccines are reported to VAERS.

Given the trends, the Corona Realism thread, concludes by stating that it is likely reasonable to conclude that such results are not a coincidence. 

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

RELATED

COVID hospitalizations, deaths for the vaccinated more than triple in one month, CDC reports

Inventor of mRNA vaccine: Jabs not justified for young, data for informed consent lacking

Inventor of mRNA vaccines ‘concerned’ by reports of excessive uterine bleeding as vaccine side effect

EXCLUSIVE - Former Pfizer VP: ‘Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’ 

Frontline Doctors: Experimental vaccines are ‘not safer’ than COVID-19


  coronavirus vaccine, robert malone

News

Pope Francis’s intent is ‘to condemn the Extraordinary Form to extinction’: Cardinal MĂźller

In his critique of the pontiff's new restrictions on the Traditional Mass, the Cardinal says Francis has hit the sheep "hard with his crook."
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 1:52 pm EST
Featured Image
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A German cardinal came out swinging against the new restrictions imposed upon the Traditional Latin Mass.  

“The clear intent is to condemn the Extraordinary Form to extinction,” wrote Cardinal Gerhard Müller regarding Pope Francis’ explosive new motu proprio. 

Müller, a former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), published his critique of Traditionis Custodes (TC) in the online The Catholic Thing yesterday. In it, the cardinal rejects the demands made by the Pope to restrict the celebration of the TLM. 

“Without the slightest empathy, [Francis] ignores the religious feelings of the (often young) participants in the Masses according to the Missal John XXIII (1962),” he stated.  

“Instead of appreciating the smell of the sheep, the shepherd here hits them hard with his crook.” 

Müller focused his attention on “Letter to the Bishops of the Whole World,” the document that accompanies Francis’ motu proprio. In this letter, the Pope explains his motives for imposing harsh controls over the Latin Mass.  The cardinal stated that they were “subjective reactions” and lacked an appropriate theological underpinning. 

“Beyond the presentation of his subjective reactions, however, a stringent and logically comprehensible theological argumentation would also have been appropriate,”  Müller stated.

“For papal authority does not consist in superficially demanding from the faithful mere obedience, i.e., a formal submission of the will, but, much more essentially, in enabling the faithful also to be convinced with consent of the mind.” 

One subjective reaction was the Pope’s intention to defend “the unity of the Body of Christ,” which he said was endangered by adherents to “celebrations according to the liturgical books prior to Vatican Council II” who allegedly reject “the Church and her institutions” as they are conceived by the Second Vatican Council. This apparently led the pontiff to “revoke the faculty” to celebrate the TLM without hindrance. However, Müller asserted that it “seems simply unjust to abolish celebrations of the ‘old’ rite just because it attracts some problematic people: abusus non tollit usum [abuse does not cancel use].” 

The cardinal affirmed the Pope’s duty to insist “on the unconditional recognition of Vatican II” and has little time for those who seek a more authentic Church in either the past or the future. 

“Nobody can call himself a Catholic who either wants to go back behind Vatican II (or any other council recognized by the pope) as the time of the “true” Church or wants to leave that Church behind as an intermediate step towards a “new Church,” he wrote.   

Nevertheless, the cardinal suggested that the Pope should turn his attention to the more pressing problems of disunity with Catholic Tradition found in the abuses of the liturgy according to the 1969/70 missal of Paul VI. The cardinal even suggested that Francis is a hypocrite for singling out the TLM, and those who assist at such Masses, as promoting disunity. 

“One may measure Pope Francis’ will to return to unity the deplored so-called ‘traditionalists’ (i.e., those opposed to the Missal of Paul VI) against the degree of his determination to put an end to the innumerable ‘progressivist' abuses of the liturgy (renewed in accordance with Vatican II) that are tantamount to blasphemy,” Müller stated. 

Defining the Catholic liturgy as the worship of the "One and Triune God,” the cardinal identified as an abuse of the modern form its “paganization ... through the mythologization of nature, the idolatry of environment and climate, as well as the Pachamama spectacle.”

These are all markers of Francis’ papacy that were, the cardinal said, “rather counterproductive for the restoration and renewal of a dignified and orthodox liturgy reflective of the fulness of the Catholic faith.” 

Meanwhile, Müller rejects the notion that liturgical diversity is a source of disunity.

“For the unity in the confession of the revealed faith and the celebration of the mysteries of grace in the seven sacraments by no means require sterile uniformity in the external liturgical form, as if the Church were like one of the international hotel chains with their homogenous design,” he wrote. 

“The unity of believers with one another is rooted in unity in God through faith, hope, and love and has nothing to do with uniformity in appearance, the lockstep of a military formation, or the groupthink of the big-tech age.”

Müller also corrected an historical misunderstanding made by Francis regarding the motives of St. Pius V when the latter promulgated the Mass of the Ages in 1570 while at the same time restricting the celebration of some less ancient rites. 

“The intention of Pope Pius V was not to suppress the variety of rites, but rather to curb the abuses that had led to a devastating lack of understanding among the Protestant Reformers regarding the substance of the sacrifice of the Mass (its Sacrificial character and Real Presence),” the cardinal explained. 

Accordingly, Müller believes the texts of the Novus Ordo deserve an overhaul.  

“Rome must oversee translation of the normative texts of the Missal of Paul VI, and even of the biblical texts, that might obscure the contents of the faith,” he wrote.   

“Presumptions that one may 'improve' the verba domini [words of the Lord] (e.g. pro multis – “for many” – at the consecration, the et ne nos inducas in tentationem – “and lead us not into temptation” – in the Our Father), contradict the truth of the faith and the unity of the Church much more than celebrating Mass according to the Missal of John XXIII.” 

A member of the German hierarchy, Müller is intimately acquainted with the plans of his nation's bishops’ conference, which includes the controversial “Synodal Way” of the German clergy. This is an ecclesial method of dialoguing on contemporary issues in theology and morality much lauded by the Argentinian pontiff. Francis has, however, offered remarks of correction to the German bishops; in 2019 when he sent them a 30-page letter in which he pointed out doctrinal landmarks to be considered during the Synodal Way. The letter seemed to make little impact. 

In his critique of the new restrictions on the TLM, Müller remarked that the majority of German bishops openly deny a multitude of Catholic teachings, even those affirmed by the Second Vatican Council, and thus are guilty of heresy. Of note is the recent defiance of the German clergy towards the CDF’s ruling against blessings for same-sex unions. 

“Here we have a threat to the unity of the Church in revealed faith, reminiscent of the size of the Protestant secession from Rome in the sixteenth century,” Müller lamented and reflected on the inequal treatment meted out to high-ranking German heretics and the world’s TLM community.  

“Given the disproportion between the relatively modest response to the massive attacks on the unity of the church in the German ‘Synodal Way’ (as well as in other pseudo-reforms) and the harsh disciplining of the old ritual minority, the image of the misguided fire brigade comes to mind, which – instead of saving the blazing house – instead first saves the small barn next to it.” 

The former Prefect of the Church’s doctrinal office asked that “special attention” be given to the Pope’s declaration that the missal of Paul VI is “the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.” The cardinal asserted that it is not possible to “declare the latest missal to be the only valid norm of the Catholic faith.”  

“One cannot simply declare the latest missal to be the only valid norm of the Catholic faith without distinguishing between the ‘part that is unchangeable by virtue of divine institution and the parts that are subject to change’ (Sacrosanctum Concilium 21),” Müller wrote.  

“The changing liturgical rites do not represent a different faith, but rather testify to the one and the same Apostolic Faith of the Church in its different expressions.”

Considering the new authority given to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Müller asked that those within the Congregation, headed by vehement anti-traditionalist Archbishop Arthur Roche, “do not become inebriated by power and think they have to wage a campaign of destruction against the communities of the old rite – in the foolish belief that by doing so they are rendering a service to the Church and promoting Vatican II.” 

The German cardinal also suggested that learning more about doctrine and the history of the liturgy would contribute both to harmony and a pastoral approach.

“A little more knowledge of Catholic dogmatics and the history of the liturgy could counteract the unfortunate formation of opposing parties and also save the bishops from the temptation to act in an authoritarian, loveless, and narrow-minded manner against the supporters of the ‘old’ Mass,” he wrote. 

Despite the seemingly bleak outlook for the liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite, Müller reminded readers that “[t]he provisions of Traditionis Custodes are of a disciplinary, not dogmatic nature and can be modified again by any future pope.” 

The papal document, released Friday, has caused a great upheaval within the Catholic Church, eliciting an eruption of consternation and criticism from the faithful, whether or not they feel attached to the ancient liturgy. Among those voices are some of the leading lights of the Catholic academic tradition, such as liturgical expert Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, who has critiqued the historical and juridical standing of the Pope’s attempt to abrogate the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), and Professor Roberto de Mattei, who articulated the goal of TC as the desire “to eliminate over time the presence of the traditional rite in order to impose the Novus Ordo of Paul VI as the only rite of the Church.” 


  cardinal muller, latin mass, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes

News

Washington DC City Council plans to vaccinate 11-year-olds without parents’ knowledge

The D.C. City Council's act has been described as 'very intentionally designed to deceive parents.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 1:30 pm EST
Featured Image
Tatevosian Yana/Shutterstock
Family Research Council
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (Family Research Council) ­– When some children are quiet for too long, their parents know to expect trouble. Some school systems deserve the same suspicion. Under the cover of the pandemic, the D.C. City Council passed an act authorizing schools to administer vaccines to children as young as 11-years-old without their parent’s consent. It even authorizes the schools to “seek reimbursement, without parental consent, directly from the insurer.”

To make matters worse, the law explicitly undermines parents with religious objections to certain vaccines, mandating that spaces on the student’s immunization record be left “blank” – presumably so the state can quietly fill them in later. Republican lawmakers tried to block the D.C. Act in February, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi prevented a vote on their Congressional Resolution of Disapproval.

Last week, Children’s Health Defense and Parental Rights Foundation sued Washington, D.C., asking a judge to block the deceptive mandate from taking effect. Mary Holland, President and General Counsel of Children’s Health Defense, explained the lawsuit on “Washington Watch.”

“This is dangerous for children because parents won't know what vaccines their children get,” she explained. If a child experiences an adverse reaction, “all of a sudden, their child could be deathly ill, and [the parents] won’t know why.” There is also a risk of vaccinating a child twice. Parents could take their child to their family pediatrician to administer a vaccine the child already received at school. For most medicines, twice the recommended dose is not recommended.

“Parents have to play a role in these decisions,” explained Holland, because “every vaccine, every drug, carries potential benefits and potential risks.” But this law is “very intentionally designed to deceive parents.” It “requires healthcare personnel to provide accurate immunization records to the Department of Health and to the student’s school, but not to parents.” It allows students to get vaccines at school without notifying their parents, and even authorizes schools to go behind parents’ back and bill their health insurance without their knowledge. “This is active concealment required by ... law,” warned Holland.

Of course, some vaccines are more controversial than others. Of particular concern are the COVID vaccines, which are authorized for emergency-use only, were only recently authorized for emergency-use on children aged 12-18, and have not received final FDA approval. Is it wise to inject children with a vaccine not yet fully tested, for a disease they are least at risk for? Parents should at least have a say.

Then there is the HPV vaccine, which protects against sexually transmitted diseases. What are we assuming by giving such a vaccine to 11-year-olds? The point is not the merits of these vaccines, but rather that parents are best positioned and have a right to make decisions concerning their children’s healthcare (that’s why they’re called “guardians”). As with critical race theory and transgender ideology, the D.C. government is using the schools to shut parents out.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Federal law mandates that parents receive Vaccine Information Statements, which provide parents with critical information to be given informed consent and care for their children receiving vaccines. D.C.’s parent-deception act violates federal law. “It’s un-American,” said Holland, not to mention “potentially precedent-setting.”

D.C.’s precedent is already being copied. Last week, the Massachusetts legislature introduced the Community Immunity Act, which would largely adopt D.C.’s policy throughout an entire state. Massachusetts parents incensed at the changes, dragged a public comment hearing out for 13 hours – past 1:00 in the morning. This is a model of what parents can do to fight back against those who want the state to destroy parental rights. For more resources on how to protect your children, visit: frc.org/education.

Reprinted with permission from Family Research Council


  child vaccine, coronavirus vaccines, dc city council, family research council, vaccine mandates

News

Canadian court upholds right to free expression after Christian event was cancelled without explanation

'In a free and democratic society, the exchange and expression of diverse and often controversial or unpopular ideas may cause discomfort.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 1:09 pm EST
Featured Image
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
By

Canadian court upholds right to free expression after Christian event was cancelled without explanation

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

NEW WESTMINSTER, British Columbia, Canada, July 20, 2021 (JCCF) — The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is pleased to announce that on Monday, July 19, 2021, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled in favour of Grace Chapel, after the City of New Westminster cancelled the church’s Christian youth conference at the City-owned and managed Anvil Centre in 2018.

The Justice Centre brought a legal action on behalf of Grace Chapel, a parish of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, located in downtown New Westminster, B.C. The Justice Centre argued that the City’s decision to cancel the Church’s conference violated the church’s freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief opinion, expression, and association. Grace Chapel’s vision includes the desire to build a multi-ethnic, diverse church.

Grace Chapel does not have a church building of its own, so it holds events in rented spaces including at the Anvil Centre. In May of 2018, Grace Chapel entered into a contract with the City to rent a portion of the Anvil Centre for a youth conference to be held later in July.

On June 20, 2018, the Anvil Centre received a single complaint from a member of the public who saw a poster promoting the conference. Only hours later, Grace Chapel received an email from Heidi Hughes, the Anvil Centre Director of Sales & Marketing, stating that the Centre was cancelling the conference on the basis that “one of [Grace Chapel’s] event speakers / facilitators …vocally represents views and a perspective that run counter to City of New Westminster and Anvil Centre booking policy.”

Ms. Hughes did not identify the “views” or “perspective” said to have led to the City’s cancellation of the conference, or explain how Grace Chapel had breached the Anvil Centre’s booking policy.

In a decision released on July 19, 2021, Justice Maria Morellato ruled that Grace Chapel is entitled to a declaration that the City’s cancellation of the conference unjustifiably infringed its right to freedom of expression under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

In response to the City’s argument that Grace Chapel’s alleged expression at the conference was of “low value”, Justice Morellato stated the following:  

In a free and democratic society, the exchange and expression of diverse and often controversial or unpopular ideas may cause discomfort. It is, in a sense, the price we pay for our freedom. Once governments begin to argue that the expression of some ideas are less valuable than others, we find ourselves on dangerous ground.

“We are pleased that the Court has vindicated our client’s freedom of expression and affirmed that government must respect the Charter in providing access to publicly-owned facilities,” states Justice Centre Staff Lawyer, Marty Moore.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“The City’s knee-jerk reaction to cancel the booking of a religious community made up primarily of new Canadians based on unfounded accusations was reprehensible,” continues Mr. Moore.

Published with permission from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms


  british columbia supreme court, freedom of expression, justice centre for constitutional freedoms, redeemed christian church of god

News

Vatican partner to axe conscience objections to abortion referrals from medical ethics code 

Pontifical Academy for Life silent on the pro-vaccine, pro-abortion World Medical Association's proposal to consider abortion referrals an “ethical obligation.” 
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 12:25 pm EST
Featured Image
wutzkohphoto / Shutterstock.com
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

FERNEY-VOLTAIRE, France, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The Vatican’s pro-abortion vaccine-promotion partner, the World Medical Association (WMA), is proposing a revision of the International Code of Medical Ethics that would require physicians to refer patients to abortionists. 

The Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL) joined the WMA for a July 2 press conference as part of their partnership to push experimental “vaccines” as it remains silent on the WMA’s proposal to axe a key conscience protection in medical ethics guidance used by governments worldwide. 

In April 2021, the WMA presented a draft revision of their International Code of Medical Ethics that states, “Physicians have an ethical obligation to minimise disruption to patient care. Conscientious objection must only be considered if the individual patient is not discriminated against or disadvantaged, the patient’s health is not endangered, and undelayed continuity of care is ensured through effective and timely referral to another qualified physician." 

The European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ) condemned this “referral obligation” in a letter to the WMA as an attempt to “normaliz[e] the practice of abortion and other non-therapeutic acts through their acceptance in medical ethics.” They further maintained that “such issues” “challenge the principle of human dignity and the preservation of life, which are at the core of a physician’s mission.” 

“The consequences of referring a patient to another doctor should not be underestimated, as the doctor engages his or her conscience in the same way as if they were performing the act themselves; in effect, they are acting in a positive way and are a direct accomplice in the final outcome of the act,” the ECLJ added. 

The WMA has openly supported abortion for years, having urged the pro-life Nicaraguan government in 2009 and 2019 to “repeal its penal code criminalizing abortion” and replace it with a pro-abortion law that the WMA said would allow physicians to practice “in line with medical ethics.” 

ECLJ has pointed out that this is a striking departure from the WMA’s original principles as expressed in the 1948 Declaration of Geneva, which “was written to bring the Hippocratic Oath up to date,” and stated, “I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception.” 

The Oxford-based Anscombe Bioethics Centre (ABC) pointed out in a May 2021 briefing paper that if a doctor objects to infant circumcision, conversion therapy, skin whitening, or elective amputation, it would contradict the doctor's "judgement of good patient care to arrange 'effective and timely referral' to a practitioner who would provide the service."  

If past comments by the PAL’s president Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia are any indication, the Pontifical Academy for Life will not sever ties with the WMA due to their hardening pro-abortion stance. 

In a 2017 paper on euthanasia presented to the WMA and GMA, Paglia stressed that the Holy See's relationship with such bodies is based on "the shared search for a common ground on which even differing opinions can find points of agreement about the truth of the human being." 

In 2019, Paglia again expressed his intention to lead PAL in “dialog[ing]” with non-Catholics, claiming that the Academy “needs to know better” certain world views “in order to widen its horizons.” 

Indeed, the Pontifical Academy for Life’s reputation for Catholic orthodoxy shattered after it was thoroughly overhauled from 2016 to 2017, and Archbishop Vicenzo Paglia was appointed its new head. Pope Francis’ new statutes for the PAL no longer require its members to sign a declaration that they uphold the Church’s pro-life teachings. 

Since then, PAL’s pro-life and pro-family members have been replaced with individuals who reject Catholic teaching, including pro-abortion University of Oxford professor Nigel Biggar; Professor Marie-Jo Thiel, who openly denounces the Catholic Church’s condemnation of sodomy and contraception; and Fr. Maurizio Chiodi, who claims that contraception may be morally obligatory. 

The ECLJ shared that more extensive debate will take place at “WMA’s dedicated conference on the subject of conscientious objection later this year or in 2022.” 


News

List of bishops already suppressing or tentatively supporting Latin Mass after Pope’s new document

LifeSite has compiled a non-exhaustive, researched list of prelates who have opted to use the motu proprio to restrict the Traditional Mass, as well as those who have granted permission for the Mass to continue – for now.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 12:24 pm EST
Featured Image
Jeff J Mitchell / Getty Images
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow Michael
By Michael Haynes

Editor’s note, July 22, 2021: We are aware that since the publication of this article, some bishops have walked back their original statements or made additional statements or clarifications. LifeSiteNews will continue to publish stories on bishops restricting or allowing the Traditional Latin Mass in the coming days. We welcome any information readers can share with us. This article was written just a few days after the motu proprio was issued and is based on the publicly available information at the time.

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Less than 24 hours after Pope Francis promulgated his new motu proprio restricting the celebration of the traditional liturgy, bishops across the world began to issue restrictions against the traditional liturgy, although some prelates have granted temporary permissions for the current “status quo” to continue.

Pope Francis issued his new motu proprio entitled Traditionis Custodes, on Friday, July 16, promoting a number of restrictions on the celebration of the traditional liturgy (also called the “Latin Mass,” the “Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite,” the “Old Mass,” the “Mass of the Ages,” the “Tridentine Mass”). Prominent among the restrictions was the directive that priests are to “request” permission from their diocesan bishops to say the Latin Mass, and consequently bishops could essentially forbid priests from saying the Latin Mass. The bishops could also decide “whether or not to retain” parishes which had been canonically erected for the offering of the traditional liturgies.

LifeSite has compiled a non-exhaustive, researched list of those prelates who have opted to use the motu proprio to restrict the Traditional Mass, as well as those who have granted permission for the Mass to continue. Rorate Caeli and Eric Sammons, editor of Crisis magazine, are also compiling lists of churches affected by the recent Papal document. Amongst the churches they list are a number of dioceses and archdioceses in Australia.

Diocese of Baguio, Philippines

The Latin Mass community of Our Lady of Atonement, in the Diocese of Baguio, Philippines, wrote that in light of the motu proprio, the normal celebration of the traditional Mass would be temporarily suspended, as of July 18. The group noted that it was hopeful for the future resumption of the Latin Mass “once we have complied with the requirements stipulated.” 

Diocese of Bismark, North Dakota

In Bismark, Bishop David Kagan has moved to suspend the traditional liturgy in his diocese, although one individual on social media wrote that the bishop had actually left it to the priest to publicly announce the decision. The Latin Mass community were thus forced to announce that the Sunday Mass on July 25 would be the Novus Ordo.

Update, July 22, 2021: A statement from Bishop Kagan is anticipated next week.

Contact information for respectful communications:
Bishop David Kagan
701-204-7219
[email protected]

Center For Pastoral Ministry
520 N. Washington St.
Bismarck, ND 58501
701-222-3035 
[email protected]

Diocese of Clifton, U.K.

A little over 24 hours after the papal decree was issued, Dom Bede Rowe and Dom Anselm Redman, of the Benedictine community of Our Lady of Glastonbury in the U.K., revealed that they had been ordered by their local bishop to cease saying the Old Mass.

“Following the Motu Proprio and instruction from Bishop Declan, the 12.30pm Latin Mass at Glastonbury will be the final Latin Mass here. Our Community continues to offer our prayers for the parishes which have been entrusted to our care.”

The two priests form the Benedictine community in Glastonbury, canonically erected in 2019 in the Diocese of Clifton by Bishop Declan Lang. In addition to the monastic horarium, the clergy have care of the Catholic parishes of Cheddar, Wells, Shepton Mallet, and Glastonbury. As such, the two priests offer a daily Latin Mass in Glastonbury, as well as a daily Novus Ordo in the churches they serve.

The Latin Mass in Glastonbury has been a prominent center for the traditional liturgy in the Diocese of Clifton, with the community being able to offer the full pre-1955 Holy Week ceremonies.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in the Clifton diocese, the bishop has expressly supported the “LGBT+Mass” which takes place on the third Sunday of every month, at the church of St. Nicholas of Torentino. The monthly Masses are for the “Catholic LGBT+ community” along with their friends and family, with the intention being “not to isolate, but rather to ensure a warm welcome and to integrate this community into Church.” The Masses have been taking place since March 2019. The Catholic Church teaches that homosexuality is intrinsically disordered and sodomy is one of the four sins that cries out to heaven for vengeance.

LifeSiteNews reported last October that at one of these Masses, the parish priest Father Richard McKay, used an un-authorized, heretical version of the creed, which highlighted the “diverse identities of all human persons.”  The “creed” also implied that same-sex attraction, alluded to as “diverse identities of all human persons,” has its origins in God.

Contact information for respectful communication:
Bishop Declan Lang
[email protected]
Tel: 0117 9733072

Diocese of Covington, Kentucky

The outgoing bishop of Covington diocese, Bishop Roger Foys, emailed Father Matthew Cushing, the priest told his parishioners, on the evening of July 16 to inform the priest that All Saints Church in Walton, Kentucky that the weekly Latin Mass would not continue.

Contact information for respectful communication:
Bishop Roger Foys
Catholic Diocese of Covington
1125 Madison Ave.
Covington, KY 41011-3115
+1 (859) 392-1500

Diocese of Little Rock, Arkansas

Bishop Anthony B. Taylor of the Diocese of Little Rock, Arkansas, was one of the first who moved swiftly to cease the celebration of the Old Mass at three churches in his diocese.

In a press release on July 16 itself, Bishop Taylor stated that there would be no change to the two personal parishes currently served by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP). However, he added that the Latin Mass “will no longer be celebrated in El Dorado, Mountain Home or Cherokee Village.” No diocesan priest is permitted to celebrate the traditional liturgy publicly under Bishop Taylor’s decrees.

Bishop Taylor earned the title of being the first U.S. bishop to close his churches for COVID-19 last year, even stating to his clergy that it “would be problematic” to give anoint those who had the novel virus. A year later, he barred lay people from delivering Communion to the sick, and choir members from singing in Mass, unless they are “fully vaccinated” with an experimental, abortion-tainted coronavirus vaccine.

Contact information for respectful communication:
Bishop Anthony B. Taylor
Catholic Diocese of Little Rock
2500 N. Tyler St.
Little Rock, AR 72207
(501) 664-0340
Online contact form

Office of the Bishop
P.O. Box 7565
Little Rock, AR 72217

Email (bishop’s secretary): [email protected]

Diocese of Mayagüez, Puerto Rico

Meanwhile in Puerto Rico, Bishop Angel Rios Matos decreed that the Traditional Latin Mass is “prohibited” in the diocese, since he writes that “no communities exist that have claimed the need to celebrate the eucharist with said extraordinary rite.” Consequently, Bishop Rios Matos forbade any promotion of the traditional liturgy, decreed that there will be no place or priest designated for the ancient rites, and furthermore prohibited the use of traditional Catholic vestments which are more commonly associated with the Old Rite.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

“I order that every priest in the diocese of Mayaguez, even when celebrating in private and without the people, shall use the Roman Misal in conformance with Vatican II,” wrote Rios Matas. “I order also that in our eucharistic celebrations, with or without the people present, the gothic chasuble, avoiding the use of the Roman chasuble, biretta, capes, linen tablecloths, humeral veils, burses, maniples and other ornaments appropriate to such a rite.”

Contact information for respectful communication:
Bo. Miradero Carr. 108 Km. 2.8 Int.
Calle Obispado Final
Mayagüez, Puerto Rico 00681
Online contact form

Archdiocese of Melbourne, Australia

Melbourne’s Archbishop Peter A. Comensoli moved to prohibit the Mass from being said at four churches in the archdiocese, apart from the personal parish of St. John Henry Newman. The archbishop granted priests permission to say the Traditional Latin Mass privately, but stated that he would be issuing more permanent decisions in the future.

Contact information for respectful communication:
Archbishop Peter A. Comensoli
Archdiocese of Melbourne
St Patrick's Centre
486 Albert Street
East Melbourne VIC 3002
+61 3 9926 5677
[email protected]

Diocese of Salt Lake City

Bishop Oscar A. Solis of the Diocese of Salt Lake City has decreed that he needs time to “thoroughly study” and “pray” over the motu proprio, and as such, the Latin Mass community at St. Mary’s, Park City, had to cancel the weekly Sunday Mass, and offer a Novus Ordo instead. 

UPDATE, July 20, 2021 at 8:30 p.m. EST: A statement on the St. Mary’s website says, On July 20th, Our bishop granted Fr. Gray temporary permission to continue celebrating the older form of the Mass, the traditional Latin Mass, until the bishop has had the opportunity to prayerfully reflect and study the matter more. For the time being, unless otherwise stated on this page, the Sunday 3pm Mass (and other Latin Masses during the week) will return to being celebrated in the older form once again. Please continue to pray for St. Mary's, for our bishop and diocese, for the pope, and for the Church!”

Contact information for respectful communication:
Diocese of Salt Lake City
27 C Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84103
(801) 328-8641
[email protected]

Diocese of Warszawa-Praga, Poland

The bishop of Warszawa-Praga, Poland, Bishop Romuald Kamiński, has also “suspended” all the celebrations of the traditional liturgy in his diocese. He noted that there are “several parish churches” in the diocese which celebrate the Latin Mass, but that he will consult with the clergy and decide upon “the place in our diocese,” where the Old Mass could be celebrated.

His clergy have not been given permission to continue offering the Traditional Mass, but have until the end of August to apply for this permission.

Contact information for respectful communication:
Email of the diocesan press office: [email protected]

Support, at least tenuous, for the Latin Mass

Some bishops have moved to allow the current provision for the Traditional Latin Mass, which was codified at the Council of Trent by Pope St. Pius V, to continue for the time being. However, a common theme amongst all such statements is that permission is “temporary,” with more permanent guidelines and policies to be issued at a later date.

Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), wrote to urge the U.S. bishops to work with “care, patience, justice, and charity as together we foster a Eucharistic renewal in our nation.”

Diocese of Springfield, Illinois

Before alphabetically listing the archdioceses and then dioceses which have made explicit reference to the motu proprio, special mention must be made of Bishop Paprocki, in Springfield.

Bishop Thomas Paprocki, who holds multiple degrees in theology and canon law, has in fact dispensed the priests in his diocese from the motu proprio. He outlined the aspects of the decree, as well as Canon 87, §1 which states that a bishop may dispense his faithful from universal and particular laws, if he judges that such be for their spiritual good.

As such, he has allowed the Canons Regular of St. John Cantius, the Canons Regular of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), to continue offering the Mass as they are currently doing. He also granted a dispensation to the prohibition on Traditional Latin Masses being offered in parish churches, and further authorized any priest currently saying the Latin Mass to continue doing so, upon making the request as directed by the Pope.

Archdiocese of Atlanta, Georgia

In the Archdiocese of Atlanta, Archbishop Hartmayer has made the stipulation that the Latin Masses are “not suppressed, particularly at the” church of St. Francis de Sales, which is served by the FSSP. Priests in the diocese who are not in the FSSP are required to request permission from the archbishop to continue saying the Mass. He is yet to meet with his advisors to determine the longer term future of the Traditional Mass in the archdiocese.

Archdiocese of Detroit, Michigan

Archbishop Vigeron of Detroit is granting a temporary reprieve from any charge to the current provision of the Traditional Mass, though he warns that he will be issuing a policy in the near future regarding the Old Mass, following a “study” of the Pope’s document. Priests who currently celebrate the Latin Mass are permitted to continue to do so, for now.

Archdiocese of the Military

The military’s Archbishop Timothy Broglio, has issued a positive letter in which he notes that the Traditional Mass and sacraments “has been a source of immense blessing and growth.” As such he has granted permission to all priests currently saying the Mass to continue doing so, until they make the required request. He also writes that any other priests who wish to offer the Latin Mass can request to do so, while he will “study” the “implications” of the motu proprio “for the good of the Christian faithful of this global Archdiocese.”

Archdiocese of New Orleans, Louisiana

New Orleans’ Archbishop Gregory Aymond also supported the traditional community, and wrote to say he was going to assess the “proper pastoral implementation” of the motu proprio, but that his “first priority” was the “spiritual sustenance” of those in the diocese, especially the attendees of the Latin Mass, whose needs “will continue to be met.”

Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Archbishop Nelson Pérez echoed many of his brother bishops in stating that the current provision for the Latin Mass would continue for now in his diocese. Such permission is temporary, as is the case in many dioceses and archdioceses, as Pérez will issue further “norms” in the coming weeks, although he did not hint at what they might be.

Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis

Archbishop Bernard Hebda wrote on July 16 to allow the current provisions for the Latin Mass to continue, while also prohibiting any new celebration of the Old Mass without his permission. While he has granted permission to say the Mass, he also asked priests currently saying it to write him for permission to continue, and Bishop Andrew Cozzens will chair a five-man “Taskforce” to determine the further of the traditional liturgy in the archdiocese.

Archdiocese of San Francisco, California

Among some of the earliest bishops to speak out in support for the Mass was San Francisco’s Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, who declared that “the Traditional Latin Mass will continue to be available here in the Archdiocese of San Francisco and provided in response to the legitimate needs and desires of the faithful.”

Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Similarly, Archbishop Paul Coakley of Oklahoma wrote that he is granting “temporary permission for those priests competent in offering Mass in the Extraordinary Form to continue to do so in churches that already have an Extraordinary Form Mass on their schedule or in a private setting until further study and clarification can inform an appropriate implementation of this document.”

Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.

Cardinal Wilton Gregory wrote that he will “prayerfully reflect” upon the motu proprio in the “coming weeks” in order to determine the future of the Mass. For now though, he has granted the permission to priests already saying the Latin Mass to continue to do so, “until further guidance is forthcoming.”

Diocese of Arlington, Virginia

Arlington’s Bishop Burbidge stated that he is “reflecting” on the document and how to best “implement the changes.” He said, “As permitted by the motu proprio, I intend to allow Masses in the Extraordinary Form to continue in the Diocese of Arlington.” However, Burbidge didn’t say whether the Old Mass will be allowed to continue in parish churches – the Diocese of Arlington is famous for its high percentage of priests who say the Traditional Latin Mass at their parishes – or whether the faithful will be relegated to another “location,” as the motu proprio suggests bishops ought to do.

Diocese of Bridgeport, Connecticut

Bridgeport’s Bishop Frank J. Caggiano wrote that “it is important” that the Old Mass is retained in the diocese. He noted that he plans to draw up norms by the end of September which both obey the motu proprio, while yet simultaneously addressing the “pastoral needs” of devotees of the Latin Mass.

Meanwhile, any pastor or priest who celebrates the Latin Mass is required to write for temporary permission, which will be given, and must explain how frequent the Mass is, how well attended, the specific date and time, and what prompted the priest to offer the Mass.

Such details are required to “compile an accurate picture of the presence and pastoral need for the celebration of Mass according to the Missal of 1962 throughout our Diocese,” stated Bishop Caggiano. The bishop went further than the prescriptions required by the Pope, requiring his priests to ask for permission to even celebrate the Latin Mass privately, not just publicly.

Diocese of Duluth, Minnesota

However, Bishop Daniel Felton of Duluth is less forthcoming, stating that the weekly Mass at St. Benedict’s, Duluth will continue, but that other parishes will have to be examined “on a case-by-case basis.” He is further banning any new celebrations of the Latin Mass.

Diocese of El Paso, Texas

According to the FSSP, Bishop Seitz of the Diocese of El Paso, Texas, has told the traditional order that their community at Immaculate Conception will remain unaltered, meaning that the daily Masses should be able to continue without change.

Diocese of Lafayette, Louisiana

Bishop Douglas Deshotel also penned his support for the (at least temporary) continuation of the current Latin Mass provision in the Diocese of Lafayette, noting that he needed to study the document in order to understand how to implement the changes.

Diocese of Lake Charles, Louisiana

In the Diocese of Lake Charles, Bishop Glen Provost issued a positive statement describing the Traditional Mass as “a blessing to many since the establishment of the Diocese, and I foresee its continuance for the pastoral care of the flock.” He also is set to issue further instructions, but leaves the current provision of the Latin Mass unchanged.

Diocese of Madison, Wisconsin

Meanwhile, Bishop Donald Hying of Madison wrote to express his “great esteem” for the traditional liturgy’s “form and its antiquity.” He granted general permission to all priests in the diocese who wished to offer the Mass, although noted he would be requiring them to ask for permission in the future, as per the dictates of Traditionis Custodes.

The current arrangement for the provision of the Latin Mass is to continue, “until further provision is made,” and effective immediately the readings at these celebrations are to be in the vernacular.

Diocese of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Bishop David Zubik has decreed that the parish of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Parish, Pittsburgh, will continue to offer the Traditional Mass daily, without any alterations.

Diocese of Oakland, California

So also has Bishop Michael Barber of Oakland, California, who granted permission to those currently saying the Latin Mass. His own permanent implementation of the motu proprio is yet to come, but it seems he remains committed to meeting the spiritual needs of devotees of the Latin Mass.

Numerous dioceses in the U.K.

The U.K.’s Latin Mass Society has been collating the various diocesan statements emerging from the Catholic bishops in the U.K. So far, Birmingham’s Archbishop Bernard Longley, Southwark’s Archbishop John Wilson, have given permission for the Mass to continue as normal for now. The Dioceses of Arundel and Brighton, Middlesborough, Hexam and Newcastle, and Salford have publicly stated the Mass situation would continue as normal for now also.

Una Voce, FSSP, SSPX respond

In light of the papal attack on the Old Mass, the Fœderatio Internationalis Una Voce (FIUV or “Una Voce”), the “worldwide organization of lay faithful attached to the celebration of the Mass according to the Editio Typica 1962 of the Roman Missal,” released a statement noting that “the characterization of Catholics attached to the Traditional Mass, and the harsh new restrictions on it, sadden us greatly.”

“We believe that the beautiful spiritual fruits of this Missal should be shared, and we pray that we can be instruments of God inside and outside the Church,” wrote the FIUV.

Meanwhile, the FSSP also issued a statement, declaring that “it is too early to tell” what the motu proprio would mean for the order, but that its priests “remain committed to serving the faithful attending our apostolates in accordance with our Constitutions and charism as we have done since our founding.”

“We must strive to see this Cross as a means of our sanctification, and to remember that God will never abandon His Church,” added the FSSP.

The Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), the traditional society founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1970, have yet to release their promised statement regarding the papal document, but have given some initial thoughts on the text. The group described the document as promoting “the extinction of those who are attached to the immemorial rite of the Holy Mass.”

RELATED:

Given its foundational falsehoods, does Traditionis Custodes lack juridical standing?

LifeSite launches petition imploring Pope Francis to withdraw decree restricting Traditional Latin Mass

LifeSite journalists react to ‘cruel,’ ‘hateful’ new motu proprio restricting Latin Mass

Reflections on the Traditional Latin Mass and the new motu proprio Traditionis Custodes

Liturgy expert: Pope’s new restriction of Old Rite Mass ‘kind of like telling millions of Catholics just to jump off a bridge or hang themselves’

ANALYSIS: Pope restricts ‘divisive’ Traditional Latin Mass, says 52-yr-old Novus Ordo is ‘unique expression’ of Church’s liturgy

BREAKING: Pope Francis abrogates Pope Benedict’s universal permission for Old Mass

‘Scandal,’ ‘bomb,’ ‘cruelty’: Tradition-loving Catholics react to Pope’s Latin Mass restrictions


  catholic, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes

News

LifeSiteNews launches fundraising campaign for church confronting lockdown bullies

GraceLife Church was forced shut by health officials for nearly 3 months
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 11:56 am EST
Featured Image
Fence around Grace Life Church Global News / YouTube
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

Help GraceLife Church by donating at this secure link!

SPRUCE GROVE, Alberta, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – LifeSiteNews has launched a LifeFunder fundraising campaign to help support the legal defense of a brave Canadian pastor and his church. 

Pastor James Coates and Grace Life Church are suing Alberta Health Services (AHS), the province’s health minister Tyler Shandro, and Chief Medical Officer of Health Deena Hinshaw, for forcing the closure of their church.  

Grace Life Church is being represented by the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). In June, Coates, Grace Life Church, and Dr. Donna Klay, Achnes Smith, and Allan Neil filed a court application to force the government to return the church building and grounds. 

Although Grace Life Church was allowed to reopen after the Alberta provincial government lifted all COVID-19 restrictions on July 1, the petitioners are determined to hold the government to account for its actions.  

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

All proceeds from the GraceLife’s LifeFunder campaign will go to the JCCF legal fund to help the church. All interested in donating can do so, with anonymity if desired, by clicking here.  

Grace Life Church is located in Spruce Grove, Alberta, a small city near the provincial capital, Edmonton. It was forced shut on April 7, 2021 after the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) raided the property under the direction of AHS, allegedly under the executive order of Shandro himself.  

Help GraceLife Church by donating at this secure link!

According to Rebel News, who provided LifeSiteNews with details about the early morning raid, Grace Life was walled off with two layers of security fencing, as well as a black tarpaulin sheet concealing the entrance to the church. The Alberta government possessed the church and its property for nearly three months, having posted guards around the premises to thwart anyone trying to enter. 

Coates and GraceLife were charged with violating the Public Health Act for having held normal church services from November 2020 to Easter Sunday, 2021. Coates spent 35 days in jail for defying Alberta COVID-19 rules because he would not sign a bail agreement to stop pastoring his church. The congregation shares the religious belief that it must gather as an entire corporate body for worship services. 

Coates walked out of the Edmonton Remand Centre a free man on March 22 after a $1,500 fine was paid “as time served.” After his release, he went straight back to preaching, but once the church was closed by AHS, he and his GraceLife congregants began to worship at secret locations.  

Coates described in detail his time in prison in an interview with Rebel News. During his incarceration, he ministered to his fellow inmates, and they thanked him on his way out by banging on their cell doors “as a sign of support,” the pastor said. 

As for GraceLife’s legal argument, it says that the public health restrictions on worship violate the community’s rights to freedom of religion; freedom of expression; freedom of peaceful assembly;  freedom of association; and liberty and security of the person as protected by sections 2 and 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  

Expert reports have been filed in support of this court challenge from medical professionals and scientists including the esteemed virologist and immunologist Dr. Byram Bridle. 

The extensive testimonies include scientific evidence that asymptomatic transmission is negligible, that masks are ineffective and irrational, and that capacity limits of church gatherings are also irrational and have no basis in science. 

The Justice Centre will also be appealing the June 7 decision of Alberta Provincial Court Judge Robert Shaigec, who ruled that the arrest, prosecution and imprisonment of Pastor Coates did not violate his Charter rights and freedoms, and that ticketing Pastor Coates for leading a regular worship service did not violate freedoms of religion, expression, assembly, and association. 

Jay Cameron, Litigation Director for the JCCF said that “Barricading GraceLife Church has everything to do with punishing dissent, and nothing to do with public safety.” 

“The Premier wines and dines his Cabinet at the Sky Palace with impunity, but church congregants cannot peacefully gather to pray together and worship on their own property in accordance with their conscience and in exercise of their constitutional freedoms,” notes Mr. Cameron.  

Last month, U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, wrote a letter blasting the news that Canadian churches were being forced to worship underground.  

“I am troubled that our Canadian neighbors are effectively being forced to gather in secret, undisclosed locations to exercise their basic freedom to worship,” Hawley told the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.  

He asked the Commission to consider adding Canada to its watch list.  

Help GraceLife Church by donating at this secure link!


News

Scores of women share stories of ‘excruciating’ pain from abortifacient IUDs, dismissal from doctors

A women’s newspaper disclosed that women suffering from these devices are often ignored and dismissed by their doctors.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 11:24 am EST
Featured Image
Clare Marie Merkowsky
By

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A recent article in the Washington Post’s women’s newspaper The Lily provides several accounts of women enduring agonizing pain after having intrauterine devices (IUDs) inserted, most of whom were dismissed by their doctors. 

The IUD is a contraceptive tool. According to IUD manufacturer Mirena, IUDs prevent pregnancy by “thickening cervical mucus, preventing sperm from entering the uterus, inhibiting sperm movement so it’s more difficult to reach and fertilize an egg.”  

It can also work as an abortifacient by thinning the lining of the uterus and preventing the embryo from attaching to the uterus. The copper IUD causes an inflammatory reaction which is toxic to sperm and eggs as well as to the fertilized embryo, thereby causing abortions.  

Many obstetricians warn their patients of potential discomfort after the IUD insertion procedure, including irregular cramping. However, many women reported extreme pain which forced them to take medication and use other non-pharmaceutical methods to deal with the pain.  

The Lily asked women to share their testimonies. One hundred thirty-one women responded, most of whom recounted severe pain either during the procedure or after they received their IUD.  

The article cites gynecologist and Planned Parenthood associate medical director Stacy De-Lin. Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest abortion chain. De-Lin claimed the “vast majority of her patients who use the IUD are thrilled with their experience,” but many said that they felt ignored or overlooked by doctors who refused to adequately address their pain and were unwilling to remove the IUDs to relieve it.  

Danielle Petermann, a 48-year-old woman who has had an IUD since 2013, said, “There are enough tales of discomfort that go beyond just taking an Advil or Tylenol that I think there should be more information available.” 

After receiving her IUD, another woman, Tiffany Washington, returned to her doctor because of intense pain that forced her to spend two days in bed. The nurse in the office reportedly rolled her eyes at Washington, asking, “Back so soon?” 

This caused Washington to reconsider her decision and to determine to attempt to endure the pain. However, after a few more weeks, she visited a local Planned Parenthood abortuary and had the device removed.  

Many other women recounted stories of doctors dismissing their complaints and instead telling them to continue with the IUDs. One doctor advised her patient to remove the IUD herself.  

Another woman, Valerie Johnson, recounted her doctor dismissing her extreme pain, only to realize weeks later that the IUD had perforated her uterus and lodged itself in a fat deposit.  

She went into surgery a few days later. “I tend to defer to the experts,” Johnson said. “I wish I had been a stronger advocate for myself when my pain was dismissed.”

Pro-lifers have long noted that most gynecologists prioritize contraception over solving women’s underlying health concerns, and that most forms of contraception – including “the pill” and IUDs – have the capacity to induce very early abortions.

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
 


  abortifacients, intrauterine device, iud, planned parenthood, women's health

News

Physicians group: Biden’s home-vaccine visits unconstitutional, unethical

The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons stated that Biden's plan to go 'door to door' to promote the COVID-19 injections, 'violates the ethical principles of protecting confidentiality and informed consent.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 10:25 am EST
Featured Image
Art Moore
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center

July 20, 2021 (WND News Center) – The Biden administration’s plan to send agents “door to door” to persuade the “vaccine-hesitant” to receive the experimental COVID-19 shots is unconstitutional and unethical, contends an association of physicians.

The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) said in a statement that the federal government’s “solicitation violates the ethical principles of protecting confidentiality and informed consent.”

“Health professionals need a patient’s implied consent even to be seen; they may not simply show up uninvited at a stranger’s home,” the doctors argue.

The AAPS declares that for “both legal and ethical reasons, the program should be discontinued at once.”

The group also notes a leaked script from the Lake County Health Department in Illinois that instructs “community health ambassadors” to keep track of the addresses and responses from residents in a “Doorknocking Spreadsheet.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

AAPS made the following observations:

  • The U.S. Constitution provides no authority for the federal government to be involved in medicine, for example, by recommending, promoting, or mandating treatments.
  • If the Ambassador knows a person’s vaccination status, the government has already been collecting personal health data and sharing it with agents having nothing to do with the person’s care, a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) will not protect you — it allows very broad disclosure to government officials.
  • States have the lawful authority to regulate the practice of medicine, but the Ambassadors are evidently not under any constraints regarding training, credentialing, documentation, or scope of practice, although they are collecting data and giving medical advice without supervision. Even medical assistants and medical scribes need to meet certain qualifications.
  • Ambassadors are promoting an experimental product, with no information on risks. Even if a product is FDA-approved, advertisers and medical professionals must divulge risks, such as heart inflammation, paralysis from Guillain-Barré or other causes, miscarriage, or death. Contrast the Ambassador’s script with the disclosures on a television ad for a drug, say one to treat your dog’s heartworm.

Reprinted with permission from WND News Center


  american association of physicians and surgeons, coronavirus vaccines, joe biden, vaccine mandates, wnd

News

New Mexico bishop denies Communion to pro-abortion Democrat

Rev. Peter Baldacchino of Las Cruces, New Mexico, prohibited a state senator from receiving the Eucharist in his diocese for voting in favor of a pro-abortion law.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 7:44 am EST
Featured Image
Bishop Peter Baldacchino of Las Cruces Diocese of LasCruces / YouTube
Raymond Wolfe Follow
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

LAS CRUCES, New Mexico, July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A New Mexico bishop last weekend denied Holy Communion to a lawmaker in his diocese who helped pass a recent pro-abortion law.

“I was denied communion last night by the Catholic bishop here in Las Cruces and based on my political office,” state Sen. Joe Cervantes tweeted Saturday. “My new parish priest has indicated he will do the same after the last was run off.”

“Please pray for church authorities as Catholicism transitions under Pope Francis,” he said.

Cervantes, a pro-abortion Democrat, earlier this year co-sponsored Senate Bill 10, which repealed an inactive state statute that restricted abortion and protected conscience rights of healthcare providers. Cervantes had voted for legislation similar to Senate Bill 10 in 2019.

“There should be no laws which outlaw the private decisions regarding pregnancy,” the senator told the Albuquerque Journal in 2020. New Mexico has some of the laxest abortion rules in the nation, allowing elective abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. 

Cervantes also backed a law this year that made New Mexico the ninth state in the U.S. to authorize doctor-assisted suicide. 

The Diocese of Las Cruces responded Monday to Cervantes’ tweet. Diocese communications director Christopher Velasquez told Catholic News Agency that “we regret the decision of Senator Cervantes to politicize this issue.” 

Velasquez noted that the denial of Communion to Sen. Cervantes came after his local priest repeatedly attempted to contact him about his support of Senate Bill 10. 

The bishop of Las Cruces, Rev. Peter Baldacchino, “did not receive a response from the senator” either, even though Cervantes “was contacted multiple times prior, letting him know that if he voted for Senate Bill 10, he should not present himself for communion,” Velasquez said. 

Bishop Baldacchino, formerly an auxiliary bishop of Miami and a priest with the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey, notably was the first American bishop to resume public Mass amid the COVID-19 crisis last year. 

His decision to withhold the Eucharist from Sen. Cervantes has been met with an outpouring of support from Catholics on social media. “We applaud the Bishop of @ROMDIOLC for standing up for the Truth! Pray for our bishops to be strong like Bishop Peter Baldacchino,” Catholic Connect tweeted Monday. 

“Your bishop is doing a great job,” Twitter user Gabrielle tweeted in response to Cervantes on Saturday. “I am pleased to see a Catholic Bishop acting like a Catholic Bishop,” wrote another user. 

Last month, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) voted to begin drafting a document that could clarify whether lawmakers like Cervantes who promote abortion should be denied the Eucharist. The Vatican had tried to suppress the measure, which passed 168-55. 

Dozens of congressional Democrats have also revolted against the policy, writing in an open letter in June that “the weaponization of the Eucharist to Democratic lawmakers for their support of a woman’s safe and legal access to abortion is contradictory.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

The Catholic Church recognizes abortion to be “gravely contrary to the moral law,” as The Catechism of the Catholic Church declares. “Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life.”

“In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it,’” Pope St. John Paul II wrote in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae

Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger reiterated those teachings in a doctrinal note while serving as the head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and stressed in a 2004 memo to U.S. bishops that politicians who vote for pro-abortion policies engage in “formal cooperation” in the “grave sin” of abortion. 

The Diocese of Las Cruces did not immediately respond to a request for comment.


  abortion, joe cervantes, peter baldacchino

News

LifeSite launches petition imploring Pope Francis to withdraw decree restricting Traditional Latin Mass

'The Traditional Latin Mass has been a source of unity for the Catholic Church for more than 1500 years, producing great saints, repentant sinners, and souls won for Christ across the world.'
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 6:00 am EST
Featured Image
David McLoone David McLoone Follow
By

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Following the release of Pope Francis’s motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, which heavily restricts the use of the Traditional Latin Mass, and the overwhelming outcry from faithful observers of Catholic tradition, LifeSiteNews has prepared a petition to be presented to the Holy Father, begging that he hear the cry of his flock and reconsider restricting the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), held so dear by so many.

On Friday the Holy See published Traditionis Custodes, in which severe restrictions have been imposed on the celebration of the TLM. Pope Francis defined the Modern Mass, or Novus Ordo Missae, as the “unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite” in the first article of the document. He went on to declare that bishops hold “exclusive competence to authorize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in his diocese,” and issue an order that parish churches are not to be used for the celebration of the Latin Mass, among other draconian measures.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Regarding the latter point, bishops are asked to establish “one or more locations” where the faithful can attend the Latin Mass within their dioceses, but without this “location” being a “parochial church” and without establishing any new personal parishes. Furthermore, priests already offering the Latin Mass, formerly the “Extraordinary Form” of the Roman Rite, secured under then-Pope Benedict XVI in his 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, are ordered that they “should request from the diocesan Bishop the authorization to continue to enjoy this faculty.” Additionally, newly ordained priests must seek approval from both the local bishop and Rome to begin saying the Old Rite of the Mass.

“Francis says that priests who have been celebrating the Tridentine rite ‘should’ seek the permission of their bishops to continue. Does ‘should’ mean ‘must’?” asked Father Peter Stravinskas at Catholic World Report. “Of course, if the document had been promulgated in Latin, we would not have to wonder about that.”

Not only has the power to restrict the TLM been placed in the hands of the bishops, contrary to the principles articulated in Summorum Pontificum, but the power to give permission to a priest willing to say the Latin Mass has been passed further up the chain of command, being centralized to the Apostolic See, an edict which itself runs contrary to the Pope’s consistent emphasis on “synodality,” as noted by Professor Roberto de Mattei.

As “lay people dedicated to Christ and His Church, we urge you to reconsider your unjust and scandalous treatment of the Traditional Latin Mass,” LifeSite’s petition to Pope Francis implores. “We urge you to have regard for the many souls who benefit spiritually from the Ancient Rite.”

Continuing, the letter recognizes that “The Traditional Latin Mass has been a source of unity for the Catholic Church for more than 1500 years, producing great saints, repentant sinners, and souls won for Christ across the world.”

“To attempt to restrict the Traditional Latin Mass as a new generation are rediscovering the treasures of God's Church will inevitably cause further division and hurt among the faithful, risking the loss of some souls who will regretfully turn away.”

“We are concerned for your own soul[,] Holy Father. We love you and hope that, with your cardinals, you will follow the sensus fidelium and reinstate the Mass of the Ages to its proper place in the Catholic Church,” the letter concludes.

Please sign and share this petition to Pope Francis, urging him to reconsider his decision, for the good of souls and the glory of God, and making sure as many cardinals support the TLM as possible. LifeSite will hand-deliver the petition to the Holy See.

RELATED:

LifeSite journalists react to ‘cruel,’ ‘hateful’ new motu proprio restricting Latin Mass

Reflections on the Traditional Latin Mass and the new motu proprio Traditionis Custodes

Liturgy expert: Pope’s new restriction of Old Rite Mass ‘kind of like telling millions of Catholics just to jump off a bridge or hang themselves’

ANALYSIS: Pope restricts ‘divisive’ Traditional Latin Mass, says 52-yr-old Novus Ordo is ‘unique expression’ of Church’s liturgy

BREAKING: Pope Francis abrogates Pope Benedict’s universal permission for Old Mass

‘Scandal,’ ‘bomb,’ ‘cruelty’: Tradition-loving Catholics react to Pope’s Latin Mass restrictions


  catholic, lifepetitions, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes

Opinion

Traditionis Custodes: Guardians of tradition or betrayers of tradition?

Is the liturgy the Pope’s personal possession that he can so blithely discard? Or is this possibly a monumental abuse of the power of the papacy?
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 8:16 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Karen Darantière
By Karen Darantière

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Traditionis Custodes, issued by Pope Francis on the Feast of Our Lady of Carmel, is an exercise in diabolically contemptuous sarcasm. But before discussing why, let’s begin by recognizing some laudable qualities that this motu proprio possesses. Indeed, Traditionis Custodes and its accompanying letter display qualities that are as rare nowadays as they are precious: clarity and brevity.  

Laudable clarity and brevity  

The intention is crystal clear: Pope Francis explicitly states his aim to abolish the Mass of the Ages, before laying down a number of norms for the implementation of this clearly stated goal. To anyone who has long been spiritually nourished by the Mass of the Ages, in communion with all the saints over the centuries, this can only appear absolutely apocalyptic.     

Here is how Pope Francis unambiguously states, in the letter accompanying his new motu proprio, this intention to thoroughly obliterate the Mass of the Ages: “I take the firm decision to abrogate all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the present Motu proprio, and declare that the liturgical books promulgated by the saintly Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, constitute the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.” This means that the venerable Traditional Latin Mass, with more than a millennium of existence, is no longer part of the Roman Rite. With one simple stroke of the pen, it has quite simply been written out of the Roman Rite. If this is not clear enough, Pope Francis also dictates two principles that all bishops must follow: even if those who are attached to the Traditional Latin Mass are temporarily permitted to continue attending it, they “need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II,” and bishops must “discontinue the erection of new personal parishes.” So, there is to be, on the one hand, temporary tolerance for already existing Traditional Mass celebrations, and on the other hand, a strict interdiction to allow any new Traditional Mass parishes. This is a clear death sentence. 

One immediately wonders: Is the liturgy the Pope’s personal possession that he can so blithely discard? Or is this possibly a monumental abuse of the power of the papacy? Indeed, Pope Benedict XVI wrote, when promulgating Summorum Pontificum: “What earlier generations held as sacred remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.” Not so, apparently, according to Pope Francis. In fact, his new motu proprio expresses the exact opposite: “What earlier generations held as sacred must be considered by us as harmful and therefore must ultimately be forbidden.”   

A model of Orwellian rhetoric 

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Taking into account this clearly expressed aim to obliterate the Traditional Roman Rite, let’s ponder a moment over the title given to the motu proprio, which is an example of what one might call Orwellian antiphrasis. Antiphrasis is the rhetorical device that consists in sarcastically saying the opposite of what is actually meant in such a way that one’s true intention is made manifest and obvious. Pope Francis clearly announces his determined will to eliminate the Traditional Mass of the Ages, and yet the decree is sarcastically entitled: ‘Traditionis Custodes,” meaning “Guardians of Tradition.” No theological studies are required to see the obvious: this is sheer sneering sarcasm that, presupposing the best intentions on the part of the Holy Father, is a trickery of the devil, who has so cleverly managed to disorient his mind and his heart.

The discord and dissonance between this clearly stated aim and this title reminds one of the names given to the totalitarian government headquarters depicted by George Orwell in his novel 1984: the Ministry of Truth, which spreads propaganda and lies, the Ministry of Peace, which prepares for war, the Ministry of Abundance, which propagates famine, or the Ministry of Love, where innocent men are tortured. In like manner, “Guardians of Tradition” instructs the shepherds to ultimately obliterate the Traditional Roman Rite. “Betrayers of Tradition” would be a much more apt title.    

Such Orwellian rhetoric could also make one think of another commonplace antiphrastic expression: “sexual and reproductive rights,” which designates in reality not the right to reproduce, to have children, but the exact contrary: the right to murder one’s own child in the womb through abortion. Likewise, these so-called “Guardians of Tradition,” rather than protecting, nurturing, and caring for it as a loving mother would do for her child, would murder it and throw its remains onto the garbage heap of history.   

Diabolical deception 

However, that is not all. Pope Francis continues: “I take comfort in this decision from the fact that, after the Council of Trent, St. Pius V also abrogated all the rites that could not claim a proven antiquity, establishing for the whole Latin Church a single Missale Romanum.” This claim of continuity with the sainted Pope Pius V is blatantly deceptive.   

There is a superficial similitude in that both popes establish unity through a single Roman Rite, but there is an essential difference that is obfuscated: Pope St. Pius V abrogated precisely the novel rites that were less than 200 years of age, thereby upholding and guarding Tradition, whereas Pope Francis does the exact contrary: it is the novel 60-year-old novus ordo mass that is made the universal norm of the Church while the ancient, venerable rite, which alone has any claim to antiquity, is abolished. Thus, Pope Francis diametrically opposes the sainted pope’s clear intentions by abolishing the Traditional Rite his predecessor so faithfully guarded.   

Moreover, Saint Pius V, in Quo Primum, in which he promulgated the Tridentine Mass, stated, “Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Would anyone, however, presume to commit such an act, he should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.” Did Pope Francis truly take this dire warning into grave consideration before issuing his motu proprio, or is he perhaps the victim of some diabolical disorientation? For, when Francis claims to be following the example of Pope St. Pius V, while in essence doing precisely the contrary, there is unquestionably some sort of diabolical deception at work.   

A protest filled with filial piety 

All of the above remarks, some Catholics might say, are disrespectful and demonstrate a lack of filial piety toward the Holy Father. We Catholics do have to be very careful to always venerate the See of Peter, especially when we feel the need to cry out in dismay at a diabolical deception aimed at attacking the heart of the Church: the Holy Mass of the Ages. Here is a very sincere question: By crying out against such ungodly trickery, is a faithful Catholic not, in fact, showing more reverential respect toward the Holy Father, than by remaining silent? We all desire to express filial piety toward our shepherds, and above all the supreme shepherd of the entire flock, the Vicar of Christ. This is done firstly by praying for the Church and for the Holy Father, but also by warning fellow Catholics who otherwise might fall prey to this deception. Were this deceit without grave consequences, perhaps silent prayer alone would be best, but this trickery aims very explicitly at the very gravest of consequences: the Abolition of Tradition. And so, with true filial piety, we might all cry out: Please, Holy Father, wake up! Open your eyes and see that Satan, sarcastically sneering, is making a cruel mockery of you and of your children! For the sake of the salvation of our souls and of your own, be a true Guardian, not a Betrayer, of the Sacred Tradition! 

RELATED: 

Given its foundational falsehoods, does Traditionis Custodes lack juridical standing? 
LifeSite launches petition imploring Pope Francis to withdraw decree restricting Traditional Latin Mass 
LifeSite journalists react to ‘cruel,’ ‘hateful’ new motu proprio restricting Latin Mass 
Reflections on the Traditional Latin Mass and the new motu proprio Traditionis Custodes 
Liturgy expert: Pope’s new restriction of Old Rite Mass ‘kind of like telling millions of Catholics just to jump off a bridge or hang themselves’ 
ANALYSIS: Pope restricts ‘divisive’ Traditional Latin Mass, says 52-yr-old Novus Ordo is ‘unique expression’ of Church’s liturgy 
BREAKING: Pope Francis abrogates Pope Benedict’s universal permission for Old Mass 
‘Scandal,’ ‘bomb,’ ‘cruelty’: Tradition-loving Catholics react to Pope’s Latin Mass restrictions


  benedict xvi, catholic, john paul ii, motu proprio, novus ordo, paul vi, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes

Opinion

A Papal attack on the Traditional Mass: Is this what the Church needs just now?

On the path to achieving this desired unity, Latin Masses are no longer allowed to be celebrated in parochial churches, thus segregating, if not banishing, some groups of the faithful – a truly contradictory way to bring about unity in the Church. It’s a strategy to get people ready for the total banning of the traditional Mass.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 2:20 pm EST
Featured Image
Pope Francis at November 2016 consistory Steve Jalsevac/LifeSite
Fr. Gerald E. Murray
By

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (The Catholic Thing) – Pope Francis’ decision in his motu proprio Traditionis Custodes [TC] to revoke the permissions granted by Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, is shocking for those of us who have appreciated and benefitted from the freedom to experience the spiritual richness of the Extraordinary Form [EF] of the Mass. The Novus Ordo Mass of Pope Paul VI is, in name and by design, precisely a new order of the Roman Mass which eliminated various elements of the previous missal and added new elements. Judgments can and should be made as to the objective value of what was left out, and what was added. That debate has gone on since the Novus Ordo was promulgated.

It’s not surprising that those who disagree with various decisions made in reforming the Mass after the Second Vatican Council sought from the Holy See the retention of the previous liturgical forms, at least as an alternative to the reformed rites. That request sprang from a desire not to lose what has been handed down to the faithful from time immemorial. The post-conciliar reformers of the Mass and of the other liturgical books intentionally did away with a great number of prayers and rituals. Those who love those now discarded elements protested, and their pleas were mercifully heard by John Paul and Benedict.

Why has Pope Francis done this? In the Letter that accompanies the motu proprio, he states: “An opportunity offered by St. John Paul II and, with even greater magnanimity, by Benedict XVI, intended to recover the unity of an ecclesial body with diverse liturgical sensibilities, was exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the Church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division.”

He’s troubled by what he sees as an “instrumental use of Missale Romanum of 1962 [that] is often characterized by a rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Vatican Council II itself, claiming, with unfounded and unsustainable assertions, that it betrayed the Tradition and the ‘true Church’.” He later restates his motivation: “A final reason for my decision is this: ever more plain in the words and attitudes of many is the close connection between the choice of celebrations according to the liturgical books prior to Vatican Council II and the rejection of the Church and her institutions in the name of what is called the ‘true Church’.”

The pope’s decision is based, in short, upon his evaluation of the motives and actions of “many” people who choose to attend (or celebrate) the EF Mass. They are somehow “exploiting” and “instrumentalizing” that Mass to reinforce divergences in the Church, encouraging disagreements that risk dividing the Church. They reject the liturgical reform, Vatican II, the Church and her institutions.

Even granting that this is an accurate description – which I do not think is true – is the proper response to the abuse of something good in and of itself the suppression of that good? Isn’t the proper response to address those supposed attitudes by engaging in a serene and respectful dialogue that seeks mutual understanding and common commitment to striving for what is good for the Church?

Now, because some people who like the EF Mass do not share an enthusiasm for the new liturgical forms and raise questions about the proper interpretation of Vatican II, TC mandates that no one will be allowed to attend this Mass in their parish church from now on. Isn’t that overkill? We do not shut down a university when some students cheat on exams or skip lectures, hanging around for four years to get a diploma. Better to identify and correct the cheaters and slackers and let everyone else carry on.

Pope Francis sees the previous generous permissions for the celebration of the EF Mass as having wounded the unity of the Church by setting aside “a single and identical prayer,” that expressed her unity: “This unity I intend to re-establish throughout the Church of the Roman Rite.” He thus instructs the bishops that, when authorizing the use of the 1962 Missal, they are “to proceed in such a way as to return to a unitary form of celebration.”

What does he mean? “Indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II, and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the “holy People of God.” (Emphases added)

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Bishops are told to act in such a way “that your care and vigilance express communion even in the unity of one, single Rite, in which is preserved the great richness of the Roman liturgical tradition.” The question immediately poses itself: If the richness of the Roman liturgical tradition were in fact preserved in the new Rite, why do so many people not find it there? Having recently attended a Solemn Pontifical Mass in the Extraordinary Form, I can testify that the richness I encountered is largely absent from the new Rite. That absence was the intended aim of the liturgical reformers. The recovery and preservation of that richness is a worthy endeavor, no matter how flawed are the ideas of some who support it.

So the goal is clearly set forth: The faithful who up to now have attended the EF Mass are by that very fact contributing, whether they realize it or not, to disunity in the Church and they must “in due time” return to the Novus Ordo Mass, the “one, single Rite,” the “unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

How long before the due time is reached? Who knows? In the meantime, on the path to achieving this unity, EF Masses are no longer allowed to be celebrated in parochial churches, thus segregating, if not banishing, some groups of the faithful – a truly contradictory way to bring about unity in the Church. It’s a strategy to get people ready for the total banning of the EF Mass.

But is this what the Church needs to be doing at this, or any other, time in history? My recent experience at the EF Pontifical Mass provides just one more strong motive for saying: “No.”

Reprinted with permission from The Catholic Thing


  catholic, latin mass, pope francis, the catholic thing, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes, vatican

Opinion

Francis has unleashed a war: It will end with the full triumph of Tradition.

The struggle over the liturgy is taking place on the brink of the abyss of schism. Pope Francis wants to hurl his critics down there, but he himself risks sinking into the abyss if he insists on opposing the Church of the Council to that of Tradition.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 9:19 am EST
Featured Image
Ruth Durkin Photography
Roberto de Mattei
By Roberto de Mattei

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 20, 2021 (Rorate Caeli) – The intent of Pope Francis’s motu proprio Traditionis custodes, of July 16, 2021, is to repress any expression of fidelity to the traditional liturgy, but the result will be to spark a war that will inevitably end with the triumph of the Tradition of the Church.

When, on April 3,1969, Paul VI promulgated the Novus Ordo Missae (NOM), his basic idea was that within a few years the traditional Mass would be only a memory. The encounter of the Church with the modern world, which Paul VI was aiming for in the name of an “integral humanism,” envisaged the disappearance of all the heirlooms of the “Constantinian” Church. And the ancient Roman Rite, which Saint Pius V had restored in 1570, after the Protestant liturgical devastation, seemed destined to disappear.

Never has a prediction shown itself more mistaken. Today the seminaries are devoid of vocations and the parishes are emptying, sometimes abandoned by priests who announce their marriage and return to civic life. On the contrary, the places where the traditional liturgy is celebrated and the faith and morals of all time are preached are crowded with the faithful and are incubators of vocations. The traditional Mass is celebrated regularly in 90 countries on all the continents, and the number of faithful who participate in it has been growing year by year, bolstering both the Fraternity of Saint Pius X and the Ecclesia Dei institutes set up after 1988. The coronavirus contributed to this growth after, following the imposition of communion in the hand, many faithful disgusted by the desecration left their parishes to go to receive the Holy Eucharist in places where it continues to be administered on the tongue.

This movement of souls was born as a reaction to that “absence of form” of the new liturgy of which Martin Mosebach wrote well in his essay Heresy of Formlessness. If progressive authors such as Andrea Riccardi, of the Community of Sant’Egidio, complain of the social disappearance of the Church (The Church is burning. Crisis and future of Christianity, Tempi nuovi, 2021), one of the causes is precisely the new liturgy’s inability to attract and failure to express the sense of the sacred and of transcendence. Only in the absolute divine transcendence is God’s extreme closeness to man expressed, Cardinal Ratzinger observed in the book that, before his election to the pontificate, he dedicated to the Introduction to the spirit of the liturgy (San Paolo, Milan 2001). The then Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith, who had always placed the liturgy at the center of his interests, after becoming Pope Benedict XVI promulgated on July 7, 2007 the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum with which he restored the full right of citizenship to the ancient Roman Rite (unfortunately defined as the “extraordinary form”), which had never been legally abrogated but which de facto had been banned for forty years.  

Summorum Pontificum contributed to the proliferation of traditional Mass centers and the flowering of a rich set of high-level studies on the old and new liturgy. The movement for the rediscovery of the traditional liturgy by young people has been accompanied by such abundant literature that it is not possible to give an account of it here. Among the most recent works it should suffice to recall the writings of Abbé Claude Barthe, Histoire du missel tridentin et de ses origines (Via Romana 2016, It. tr. Solfanelli 2018) and La Messe de Vatican II. Dossier historique (Via Romana, 2018); by Michael Fiedrowicz, The Traditional Mass: History, Form, and Theology of the Classical Roman Rite (Angelico Press, 2020) and by Peter Kwasniewski, Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness: Why the Modern Age Needs the Mass of Ages (Angelico 2017, It. tr. Faith and Culture, 2021). No studies of equal value have been produced in the progressive field.       

Faced with this movement of cultural and spiritual rebirth, Pope Francis reacted by instructing the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to send the bishops a questionnaire on the application of Benedict XVI’s motu proprio. The survey was sociological, but the conclusions that Francis drew from it are ideological. There is no need for a survey to see how the churches attended by the faithful attached to the liturgical tradition are always full and the ordinary parishes are increasingly depopulated. But in the letter to the bishops accompanying the motu proprio of July 16, Pope Francis affirms: “The responses reveal a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene. Regrettably, the pastoral objective of my Predecessors, who had intended ‘to do everything possible to ensure that all those who truly possessed the desire for unity would find it possible to remain in this unity or to rediscover it anew,’ has often been seriously disregarded.”

“I am saddened,” Francis adds, “that the instrumental use of the Missale Romanum of 1962 is often characterized by a rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of Vatican Council II itself, claiming, with unfounded and unsustainable assertions, that it betrayed the Tradition and the ‘true Church’.”  Therefore “I take the firm decision to abrogate all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the present Motu proprio.”

Pope Francis did not see fit to intervene in the face of the laceration of unity produced by the German bishops, who often fell into heresy in the name of Vatican Council II, but he seems convinced that the only threats to the unity of the Church come from those who have raised doubts over Vatican II, as doubts have been raised over Amoris Laetitia, without ever receiving an answer. Hence art. 1 of the motu proprio Traditionis custodes, according to which “the liturgical books promulgated by the saintly Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, constitute the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

On the level of law, the revocation of the individual priest’s free exercise of celebrating according to the liturgical books from before the reform of Paul VI is clearly an illegitimate act. In fact, Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum reiterated that the traditional rite has never been abrogated and that every priest has the full right to celebrate it anywhere in the world. Traditionis custodes interprets that right as a privilege, which, as such, is withdrawn by the Supreme Legislator. This modus procedendi, however, is completely arbitrary, because the lawfulness of the traditional Mass does not arise from a privilege, but from the recognition of a subjective right of the individual faithful, whether lay, clerical, or religious. In fact, Benedict XVI never “granted” anything, but only recognized the right to use the 1962 Missal, “never abrogated,” and to enjoy it spiritually.

The principle that Summorum Pontificum recognizes is the immutability of the bull Quo primum of St. Pius V of July 14, 1570. As noted by an eminent canonist, Abbé Raymond Dulac (Le droit de la Messe romaine, Courrier de Rome, 2018), Pius V himself did not introduce anything new, but restored an ancient liturgy, granting every priest the privilege of celebrating it in perpetuity. No pope has the right to abrogate or change a rite that dates back to the Apostolic Tradition and has been formed over the centuries, such as the so-called Mass of St. Pius V, as the great liturgist Msgr. Klaus Gamber confirms in the volume that, in the French edition, bears a preface by Cardinal Ratzinger (La Réforme liturgique en question, Editions Sainte-Madeleine, 1992).

In this sense, the motu proprio Traditionis custodes can be considered a more serious act than the exhortation Amoris laetitia. Not only does the motu proprio have canonical applications of which the post-synodal exhortation is devoid, but while Amoris laetitia seems to grant access to the Eucharist to those who have no right, Traditionis custodes deprives of the spiritual good of the perennial Mass those who have a right to this inalienable good, and need it in order to persevere in the faith.

Also evident is the ideological framework of considering a priori as sectarian the groups of faithful attached to the liturgical tradition of the Church. They are spoken of as if they were subversives who must be placed under observation without criteria of judgment (cf. nos. 1, 5, and 6), their right of association is limited and the bishop is barred from approving others, limiting the proper right of the ordinary (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 321, §2). Groups of the faithful, in fact, have so far arisen spontaneously and have become representatives of certain requests with the legitimate authorities, but they have never been “authorized.” Considering authorization as necessary for the birth of a group constitutes a serious vulnus to the freedom of association of the faithful that Vatican II itself advocated, just as for that matter there is a violation of the Council in the provision that turns bishops into mere executors of the papal will.

Traditionis custodes confirms Pope Francis’s process of the centralization of power, in contradiction with his constant references to “synodality” in the Church. By the book it is “exclusively” up to the bishop to regulate the Extraordinary Form in his diocese, but in fact the motu proprio (cf. art. 4) limits the bishop’s discretion and autonomy where it decrees that his authorization for the celebration of the Mass requested by a diocesan priest is not enough, but a placet from the Apostolic See must in any case be requested. This means that the bishop cannot grant that authorization (which is never defined as a faculty and therefore seems to be more than anything else a privilege) autonomously, but his decision must still be examined by the “superiors.” As Father Raymond de Souza observes, “more permissive regulations are forbidden; more restrictive ones are encouraged.”

The goal is clear: to eliminate over time the presence of the traditional rite in order to impose the Novus Ordo of Paul VI as the only rite of the Church. Reaching this goal requires a patient re-education of the unruly. Therefore, as the letter to the bishops states, “indications about how to proceed in your dioceses are chiefly dictated by two principles: on the one hand, to provide for the good of those who are rooted in the previous form of celebration (the ancient Roman Rite - Ed.) and need to return in due time to the Roman Rite promulgated by Saints Paul VI and John Paul II (the new Roman Rite or Novus Ordo Missae - Ed.), and, on the other hand, to discontinue the erection of new personal parishes tied more to the desire and wishes of individual priests than to the real need of the ‘holy People of God’.”

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

Tim Stanley is not wrong when, in the Spectator of July 17, he defines this as a “merciless war against the Old Rite.” Benedict XVI, with Summorum Pontificum, publicly acknowledged the existence of an immutable lex orandi of the Church that no pope can ever abrogate. Francis, on the other hand, manifests his rejection of the traditional lex orandi and, implicitly, of the lex credendi that the ancient Rite expresses. The peace that Benedict XVI’s motu proprio had tried to ensure in the Church is ended, and Joseph Ratzinger, eight years after his resignation from the pontificate, is condemned to witness the war that his successor has unleashed, as in the epilogue of a Greek tragedy. 

The struggle is taking place on the brink of the abyss of schism. Pope Francis wants to hurl his critics down there, pushing them to establish, in fact if not in principle, a “true Church” opposed to him, but he himself risks sinking into the abyss if he insists on opposing the Church of the Council to that of Tradition. The motu proprio Traditionis custodes is a step in this direction. How is it possible not to notice the malice and hypocrisy of one who intends to destroy Tradition while calling himself “guardian of Tradition?” And how can one fail to observe that this is happening precisely at a time when heresies and errors of all kinds are devastating the Church?

If violence is the illegitimate use of force, Pope Francis’s motu proprio is an objectively violent act because it is overbearing and abusive. But it would be a mistake to respond to the illegitimacy of violence with illegitimate forms of dissent.

The only legitimate resistance is that of those who do not ignore canon law and firmly believe in the visibility of the Church; of those who do not give in to Protestantism and do not presume to become pope against the pope; of those who moderate their language and repress the disordered passions that can lead them to rash gestures; of those who do not slip into apocalyptic fantasies and maintain a firm balance in the storm; finally, of those who base everything on prayer, in the conviction that only Jesus Christ and no one else will save his Church. 

Reprinted with permission from Rorate Caeli


  catholic, latin mass, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes, vatican

Blogs

What is the difference between the Novus Ordo and Latin Mass? Watch this

Prior to the Second Vatican Council and the introduction of the Novus Ordo, the Catholic Church formalized the Mass more than 1,500 years ago.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 5:09 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In the wake of Pope Francis’s motu proprio Traditionis Custodes severely restricting the Traditional Latin Mass, which came out last Friday, I would like to share with you a basic take on what has been happening, including the differences between the Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo.

Before beginning, I want to point out that even though I myself attend a reverent Novus Ordo parish, when I have traveled I have had access to the Traditional Latin Mass and have been moved by it and longed for it. In this episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, I point out the changes that the New Mass has brought THAT make the Ancient Mass so attractive to so many young people today.

Prior to the Second Vatican Council and the introduction of the Novus Ordo in 1969, the Catholic Church had  formalized the Mass more than 1,500 years ago at the Council of Trent. This liturgy, also known now as the TLM, the Old Rite, or the Mass of the Ages, was codified by Pope St. Pius V.

But during and shortly after Vatican II, the Catholic liturgy was drastically altered with major changes.

Some of these changes include:

  • the priest no longer faced the tabernacle (ad orientem), but the people

  • the Mass readings, apart from the Gospel, were permitted to be read by laypeople

  • girls were permitted to serve at the altar, rather than only boys

  • the Latin language, and many prayers and chants – which some date back to the apostolic times – were removed

  • a de-emphasis on Hell and Judgement

  • the Mass changed from being regarded as a Sacrifice to being regarded as a meal; a “horizontal” outlook rather than a “vertical” one

  • the faithful in the Old Mass would receive Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue, rather than standing and in the hand

These are just a few of the changes and differences between the two Masses, not to mention even the many theological significances of the actions of the priest during the TLM. Some of these were totally removed in the Novus Ordo.

Also, the very fact that the Old Mass was celebrated by countless saints throughout the ages for more than a thousand years, and then was drastically changed in the 1960s during a time of revolution against tradition and orthodoxy is a great tragedy for the Church.

All of this has led to the greatest abandonment of the faith in history.

It is up to us a Catholic laity to uphold the faith which was handed down to us from our predecessors and which Jesus Christ Himself gave to us. Please sign and share our petition to Pope Francis that he may reconsider and rescind this unjust and scanadalous order.

And let us all pray, fast, and do penance for the salvation of souls, including our shepherds, during these difficult days in the Church and the world.

The John-Henry Westen Show is available by video on the show’s YouTube channel and right here on my LifeSite blog.

It is also available in audio format on platforms such as SpotifySoundcloud, and Acast. We are awaiting approval for iTunes and Google Play as well. To subscribe to the audio version on various channels, visit the Acast webpage here.

We’ve created a special email list for the show so that we can notify you every week when we post a new episode. Please sign up now by clicking here. You can also subscribe to the YouTube channel, and you’ll be notified by YouTube when there is new content.

You can send me feedback, or ideas for show topics by emailing [email protected].

Subscribe

* indicates required

By clicking subscribe, you are agreeing to receive emails about The John-Henry Westen Show and related emails from LifeSiteNews.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please visit our website.

We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By clicking below to subscribe, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing. Learn more about Mailchimp's privacy practices here.


  catholic, john-henry westen, john-henry westen show, latin mass, novus ordo, pope francis, the john-henry westen show, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes

Blogs

Sports Illustrated’s new transgender cover model is the latest harbinger of our confusing future

If the future is fluid, confusion is guaranteed.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 12:28 pm EST
Featured Image
Instagram screenshot
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Everywhere you look these days, the transgender movement is sending the culture a message: Anything girls can do, biological men identifying as girls can do better. Trans athletes are killing it at track meets. They’re breaking heads in mixed martial arts. They’re destroying in wrestling matches. They’re winning beauty pageants. One of them even won Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year. 

Now, a transgender model has landed the cornerstone of the male soft-core porn industry: the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. One a lowbrow mag found largely in the lockers of teenage boys – this is before ubiquitous digital porn made the photo spreads seem quaint – Sports Illustrated, too, has gone woke. The swimsuit issue this year is titled “Opening Eyes, Speaking Truths and Changing Minds” and features three covers, one with rapper Megan Thee Stallion, one with tennis star Naomi Osaka, and one with transgender activist Leyna Bloom (a man).  

This isn’t the first time Sports Illustrated has featured a transgender person – that distinction belongs to Valentina Sampaio, a post-op Brazilian man identifying as female. Like Bloom, he very much looks female. Surgery, cosmetic alterations, and airbrushing have ensured that these men – unlike most men identifying as women – actually look quite female.  

These days, it seems like “trans women” break several new glass ceilings every week. Bloom posted the cover to Instagram, stating that: “This moment heals a lot of pain in the world. We deserve this moment and we have waited millions of years to show up as survivors and be seen as full humans filled with wonder.” Of course, nobody is saying trans people aren’t people – we’re saying men cannot become women and women cannot become men. As for “millions of years,” this movement is brand new. 

Bloom went on:  

I’m so happy, honored, and humbled to share that I’m the first trans woman to grace the cover of Sports Illustrated! I have dreamt a million beautiful dreams but for girls like me, most dreams are just fanciful hopes in a world that often erases and omits our history and even existence. This moment is so powerful because it allows me to live forever even after my physical form is gone. Not a lot of people get to live in the future, so at this moment, I’m proudly choosing to live forever. I dedicate this cover to all ballroom femme queens past, present and future. This historical moment is important to girls like us because it allows us to live and be seen. Many girls like us don’t have the chance to live our dreams, or to live long at all. I hope my cover empowers those, who are struggling to be seen, feel valued. Let me be a messenger guiding us to a future of respect and appreciation for all women in all forms and from all walks of life. 

The “girls like us,” of course, are not actual girls, but boys identifying as girls (albeit with breasts and feminine-looking forms, which have no effect on their chromosomes). And every time a trendy “trans girl” takes another award or prize or spot from an actual female, the space allotted to women shrinks. That said, biological men identifying as women and winning beauty pageants and landing on swimsuit covers has got to be some sort of feminist nightmare: patriarchy combined with crude objectification. To many trans activists, being gawked at and catcalled like a real girl is the goal, not an irritating part of life in a pornified culture. 

Our culture is about to get a lot more confusing. There are currently yards-long Twitter threads debating what the etiquette is when a biological man identifying as a woman has managed to “pass” and is out on a date with a man or a lesbian woman. Women have reported being traumatized to discover that the “female” they are with is in possession of fully functioning male genitalia. In case you think this is a far-fetched scenario, I had a friend in university who discovered that his female date was actually male halfway through a date – and that was ten years ago.  

If the future is fluid, confusion is guaranteed. This is Alfred Kinsey’s wildest dream come true. 


  gender confusion, gender fluidity, leyna bloom, lgbt, sports illustrated, transgenderism

Blogs

Given its foundational falsehoods, does Traditionis Custodes lack juridical standing?

What is at stake is a theological claim about the objective status of the monuments of liturgical tradition—something that does not depend on a papal decision, unless papal authority is now deemed to extend to rewriting the past, something that theologians maintain not even the omnipotent God can do.
Tue Jul 20, 2021 - 6:00 am EST
Featured Image
Cardinal Raymond Burke distributes Holy Communion at a traditional Latin Mass in Rome after a LifeSiteNews and Voice of the Family conference (October 2018). Voice of the Family / Flickr
Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter
By Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

July 20, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Article 1 of the motu proprio Traditionis Custodes reads: “The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

The pope here claims that the Novus Ordo is the only law of prayer for the Roman Rite. It is impossible to see how this is compatible with the history of the Church and with her reverence for the venerable rites of antiquity and the Middle Ages, epitomized in the Missale Romanum of 1570 and its subsequent integral editions. They, too, are the lex orandi and cannot be otherwise. Instead, the motu proprio fumblingly makes “lex orandi” do duty as a juridical, canonical term, able to be applied ad libitum, as if it were an extrinsic label. In reality, the lex orandi is the whole complex of historical prayer texts, ceremonies, and music that make up the Roman Rite.

The only way to sustain the fiction of Article 1 is to claim that there is so great a continuity between the old missal and the new missal that the new one is simply an updated version of the old one—that the Novus Ordo is substantially the same as the traditional Roman Rite that preceded it is. Francis’s letter to the bishops makes just this move:

It must therefore be considered that the Roman Rite, adapted several times over the centuries to the needs of the times, has not only been preserved but also renewed “in faithful obedience to Tradition.” Those who wish to celebrate with devotion according to the previous liturgical form will not find it difficult to find in the Roman Missal, reformed according to the mind of the Second Vatican Council, all the elements of the Roman Rite, especially the Roman Canon, which is one of its most characteristic features.

One can only stare in amazement at the flagrant falsehood of this pair of sentences.

As Michael Fiedrowicz (among many others) has unanswerably demonstrated in his recent book The Traditional Mass: History, Form, and Theology of the Classical Roman Rite, the Roman Rite has witnessed many changes over the centuries, but its development has been slow, steady, and continuous, a truly organic body of texts, ceremonies, and music. It was never “adapted” for a particular century by a super-committee treating all the material of the liturgy as raw matter at their disposal to be reorganized, rewritten, and innovated ad libitum, with a papal fiat for ensoulment. St. Pius V did not create a new set of liturgical books but codified as carefully as possible the historical practice of the Church of Rome, a lex orandi fully expressive of the Catholic Faith that was then under attack by the Protestants. He solemnly established this rite of Mass as a regula fidei by his Apostolic Bull Quo Primum of July 14, 1570. This Bull was republished in subsequent editions of the missal by his papal successors, as a sign of continuity in the lex orandi, precisely so that the lex credendi might be fully preserved and handed down.

In stark contrast, the liturgical books promulgated by Paul VI were fashioned out of bits and pieces of older Western books and non-Western sources, spliced in with new compositions, and unmoored from a linguistic, rubrical, and musical heritage that was shared, with local variations, by all Western Catholics prior to the Reformation. His missal was the first since 1570 not to be prefaced with Quo Primum, an eloquent absence that testifies to its discontinuity from the preceding tradition. Call it what you will, this interruption of transmission is what made possible in the first place the confusing situation to which Summorum Pontificum was directed as a pastoral response.

Therefore, when Francis asserts that “all the elements of the Roman Rite” will be found in the modern Roman Missal of Paul VI and John Paul II, he is asserting a falsehood, and we need to call him out on that as clearly and as boldly as possible. How vastly the two missals, traditional and modern, contrast and diverge has been the subject of voluminous scholarly studies. I have contributed to this body of work with several lectures that would make for useful reading as we endeavor to respond to the badly-argued and factually erroneous motu proprio:

Since the claim of substantive continuity and merely superficial revisions cannot be maintained against evidence to the contrary, Pope Benedict in a spirit one might call charitable pragmatism decided to let both of these “traditions”—the one that was centuries old and the one newly-crafted in the sixties—coexist in an unprecedented situation. He could not think of another way to break through the impasse Paul VI’s decision had created, and he wished to be as generous as possible to those who continued to adhere to the traditional liturgy, which could not be held against them as a moral fault or in any way opposed to the Faith without simultaneously calling into question the Church’s internal coherence. He himself had had many second thoughts about the liturgical reform and saw it as necessary to let the older form—really, a different rite, by all standards—continue in force.

In keeping with the judgment of a commission of cardinals appointed years before by Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI asserted that the Tridentine rite, which he dubbed “the Extraordinary Form,” was “never abrogated” (Summorum Pontificum, Article 1; cf. Con Grande Fiducia, “this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted”). The deeper reason why it was not abrogated, however, is not that Paul VI just forgot to do so, or flubbed the right steps. Rather: “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place” (Con Grande Fiducia, emphasis added).

These are statements of ecclesiological fact: they tell us how things actually are. When he speaks thus, Pope Benedict is not addressing a matter of discipline but expressing truths about the nature of Catholic liturgy in history and its inherent authority as a monument of tradition.

So thoroughly does Francis evacuate Benedict’s motu proprio of its theological sense that it seems the new motu proprio “has legislated on the basis of an incomplete argument and false information,” as Christophe Geffroy observes. Francis’s contradiction of his predecessor on this point is obvious, for Traditionis Custodes’s fundamental message is: “What earlier generations held as sacred does not remain sacred and great for us too, and it can be all of a sudden entirely forbidden and considered harmful. It does not behoove all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, or to give them a place at all.”

What are we to make of this contradiction? One pope or the other is correct, and again, only one can be right, because these are universal truth claims, not prudential determinations. Let’s say it again: We are not dealing here with this or that liturgical preference, with giving or withdrawing particular permissions. What is at stake is a theological claim about the objective status of the monuments of liturgical tradition—something that does not depend on a papal decision, unless papal authority is now deemed to extend to rewriting the past, something that theologians maintain not even the omnipotent God can do.

— Article continues below Petition —
  Show Petition Text
0 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
  Hide Petition Text

There are at least three falsehoods that play a pivotal role in Traditionis Custodes:

  1. As we have just discussed, the New Mass is not what he says it is. Valid, to be sure; but by no ingenuity of reasoning, by no metric whatsoever, can it be said to be just another “adaptation” of the same Missale Romanum.
  2. The motives of John Paul II and Benedict XVI are blatantly misrepresented in Francis’s pair of documents, and their theological premises are directly contradicted.
  3. The traditional world is not what he says it is—and the results of the touted survey have not been honestly submitted to the public. We know of bishops, especially from the United States, who submitted positive reports, something one would never be able to glean from the stern tone of the papal letter. An inside source who works at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith summed up for me the entirety of the survey: “cautiously positive.” That sounds nothing like the picture painted by Francis and by the notoriously hostile episcopal conferences of France and Italy. Who are we to trust? The McCarrick scandal was investigated only because of outside pressure; the examination went at a snail’s pace; and the final report was inadequate. The Vatican’s transparency or penchant for truth-telling does not inspire confidence. Yet bishops are asked to throw flourishing congregations of faithful Catholics under the bus because of supposedly negative survey results—on a “just trust us” basis?

Let me offer a comparison: imagine a civil authority ordered a beloved city zoo closed because of “frequent and saddening reports” of incidents of animals harming visitors, and because the only people who go to zoos hate animals anyway. But if such incidents were in fact not taking place with any regularity, and the latter claim was outright falsehood and calumny, in what sense would subordinates be obliged to close the zoo?

These fallacious claims are the columns upon which Francis’s disciplinary directives stand. But common sense and logic bid one to ask: Can a document based on falsehoods have juridical standing? How can it be taken seriously as a juridical instrument? An instrument is vitiated if it is promulgated on a false basis, resulting from the legislator’s lack of due knowledge and regnative prudence. In logical form: “Given X, one should do Y. But X is demonstrably false; therefore we refrain from doing Y.”

Another hallowed principle from canon law is relevant: a doubtful law does not bind. Many bishops have already indicated the need for careful study before implementing the motu proprio, despite the document going into effect immediately. As they deliberate on what to do, let them keep this in mind: as it stands, between errors, contradictions, and ambiguities, Traditionis Custodes is so full of doubtfulness that it is hard to see how one could responsibly act upon it. Given its systemic weaknesses, those who do act upon it risk committing sins of imprudence and injustice, sins against charity and ecclesial communion. We cannot fail to note with sorrow how consistently the new provisions fit into the whole pattern of Francis’s pontificate, with its fruits of ambiguity and anarchy.


  catholic, pope francis, summorum pontificum, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes