All articles from July 21, 2021






  • Nothing is published in Video on July 21, 2021.

The Pulse

  • Nothing is published in The Pulse on July 21, 2021.


6 ‘fully vaccinated’ Texas Dems now have COVID-19 after fleeing the state to prevent passage of election integrity bill

All of the Texas Democrats in D.C., including those who have tested positive for COVID-19, are 'fully vaccinated,' and have been since March.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 9:55 pm EST
Featured Image
Texas Democrats jetting to D.C. without masks Twitter / screenshot
Raymond Wolfe Follow

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The number of Texas Democrats who have contracted COVID-19 after fleeing the state to block a Republican voting bill has risen to at least six.

A spokesperson for the Texas Democratic Caucus confirmed to NBC News on Monday that a sixth lawmaker tested positive for the virus and has begun quarantining. The caucus will cease providing a daily COVID-19 case count, the spokesperson added.

Last week, more than 50 Democrats from the Texas House flew to Washington, D.C., chartering a private jet and foregoing masks, which are required for commercial airline passengers in the U.S. who are older than two. They also were photographed with a case of Miller Lite.

The representatives left Texas to deny a quorum and prevent passage of Senate Bill 1, legislation championed by Republicans that would ban 24-hour voting and require monthly voter roll checks, among other provisions. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) named election integrity a top priority for the current special legislative session he called after House Democrats killed another voting bill in May.

All of the Texas Democrats in D.C., including those who have tested positive for COVID-19, are “fully vaccinated,” and have been since March, Texas Rep. Gene Wu wrote on Twitter. “We got complacent because we felt safe,” he tweeted Monday, acknowledging that coronavirus vaccines do not necessarily stop viral transmission.

“Being vaccinated doesn’t ALWAYS stop you from spreading the virus,” he said.

In addition to infecting each other, the lawmakers may have given COVID-19 to at least one infected White House staffer, as well as to an aide of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  

The staffer for Pelosi had ushered the Democrats around the Capitol and went to a rooftop reception with them that was also attended by the White House official, Axios reported Tuesday. Both individuals got COVID despite being vaccinated, Axios said.

— 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 White House has said that neither Joe Biden, nor other senior officials, have had recent direct contact with the staffer who has tested positive for coronavirus.

“We certainly understand there will be breakthrough cases,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday, remarking that COVID-19 vaccines “are not foolproof.”

“They’re not 100 percent effective. We’ve seen that,” she said.

Psaki also revealed that the Biden administration has experienced an undisclosed number of “breakthrough” COVID-19 cases among officials who have received coronavirus vaccines.

The Texas Democrats last week had met with Vice President Kamala Harris and Democratic senators, pushing the Senate to pass a radical election bill, H.R. 1, which would ban state voter ID laws. Harris, who compared the legislators to Frederick Douglass and people who “shed their blood” for voting rights, has not quarantined since the meeting.  

Press secretary Psaki said this week that Harris tested negative for COVID-19 after the meeting, contradicting an earlier statement from the Vice President’s office, which claimed that Harris and her staff did “not need to be tested or quarantined” as they “were not at risk of exposure” and were “not in close contact with those who tested positive[.]”

Gov. Abbott and fellow Texas Republicans have blasted the runaway Democrats’ “super spreader” trip to D.C., with Abbott branding it a “disaster.”

“Because they abandoned their responsibility, when they get back to Texas, I will be calling another special session and put this back on the agenda as well as so many other items that are so important to their constituents,” he said yesterday in an appearance on Fox News.

“Texas House Democrats engaged in performance theater for weeks claiming Gov. Abbott was putting lives at risk by reopening the state economy and waiving the statewide mask mandate,” Travis County GOP Chairman Matt Mackowiak said.

“Then they flew to D.C. on a private jet stocked with Miller Lite without masks, in violation of FAA rules, and now this farce turned into a super spreader event.”

  coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccines, jen psaki, joe biden, kamala harris, texas democrats, white house


Canadian doctor warns the worst is ‘yet to come’ from blood clotting damage linked to COVID-19 shots

Dr. Charles Hoffe says 62 percent of the individuals who received injection have shown evidence of clotting,
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 9:14 pm EST
Featured Image
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

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

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A Canadian doctor claims he has seen blood clotting in the majority of his patients who have had COVID-19 jabs and has issued a “grim” outlook that the worst is “yet to come” due to potential “permanent” damage caused by the injections.  

“And so, I'm still trying to accumulate more information. But on the ones I have so far, 62 percent of them have evidence of clotting, which means that these blood clots are not rare. It means that the majority of people are getting blood clots that they have no idea that they're even having,” said Dr. Charles Hoffe of Lytton, British Columbia, in an interview with Vancouver-based Christian broadcaster Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson last week.   

“So, Laura-Lynn, the most alarming thing about this is that there are some parts of your body, like your heart and your brain and spinal cord and lungs, which cannot regenerate. When those tissues are damaged by blood vessels, they are permanently damaged.”  

Hoffe’s remarks are not his first concerning COVID-19 injections.  

In April, he was punished by his local health authority because he raised concerns about the side effects he observed in some of those who had received the Moderna COVID-19 jab within his community. 

Hoffe said he was barred from working in the local ER after his local health authority “suspended” his clinical privileges “for the crime of causing ‘vaccine hesitancy,’ for speaking out about my vaccine injured patients.” 

Hoffe told Tyler Thompson that in a single dose of one COVID-19 jab (Moderna) there are “40 trillion messenger RNA molecules” and that only 25 percent of the jab stays at the injection site.  

The rest of the COVID-19 injection, said Hoffe, goes on to “circulate through the bloodstream, and end up in the tiny capillary vessels,” whereby one’s body “then gets to work reading these genes and manufacturing trillions and trillions of COVID spike proteins.” 

Hoffe said the spike proteins that one’s body begins to manufacture are in the “trillions,” and become part of one’s “vascular endothelium.”  

This is where issues come up, according to Hoffe. He said the cells that line one’s blood vessels are “supposed to be smooth so that your blood flows smoothly.” 

“Now we have these little spiky bits sticking out. So it is absolutely inevitable that blood clots will form because your blood platelets circulate around in your vessels,” said Hoffe. 

— 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

Hoffe explained that the clots are “microscopic.”  

“These are tiny, literally on a capillary level, and they are scattered throughout your capillary network. So they are not going to show on any scan, they are just too small and too scattered,” said Hoffe. 

The ‘worst is yet to come,’ warns Doctor  

Hoffe gave a dire warning, saying that the “mechanism of injury” from the COVID-19 shots is “causing permanent damage” to organs that cannot regenerate and that “the worst is yet to come.” 

“Because, you know, there are some tissues in your body like intestine and liver and kidneys that can regenerate to quite a good degree. But brain and spinal cord and heart, muscle and lungs do not. When they're damaged, it's permanent,” said Hoffe. 

“Like all these young people who are now getting myocarditis from these shots, they have permanently damaged hearts. It doesn't matter how mild it is, they will not be able to do what they used to be able to do because heart muscle does not regenerate. So this is the terrifying concern.” 

He then said the long-term outlook is “very grim.” 

“With each successive shot, the damage will add and add. And it's going to be cumulative because you're progressively getting more and more damaged capillaries,” said Hoffe. 

Hoffe said the only predictable way to “find out for sure” if the clots are there is to do what is called a blood D-Dimer test, which he says he has been doing on his patients.  

“And so, the D-Dimer is a blood test that shows a recent blood clot. It doesn't show anything else other than a recent blood clot. And it won’t show an old blood clot, it only shows new blood clots. And so, I have been doing that on my patients, finding people who have recently had their COVID shot within the previous seven days, to needs to be between four and seven days and doing a blood test on them called a D dimer,” said Hoffe. 

Hoffe said that in his practice, he has seen six people who showed reduced lung capacity, meaning “that they just get out of breath much more easily than they used to.” 

“I have one fellow that used to walk to my office every week for actually for an arthritis injection who told me that he could walk two miles without any problem. And now after a quarter of a mile, he is absolutely out of breath. And it has been like that for five months,” said Hoffe. 

Hoffe noted that what has happened to his six patients is that the clots have plugged up “thousands of tiny capillaries in their lungs.” 

“And the terrifying thing about this is not just that these people are not short of breath and can't do what they used to be able to do. But once you block off a significant number of blood vessels through your lungs, your heart is now pumping at a much greater resistance to try and get the blood through your lungs. And the problem, so that causes a condition called pulmonary artery hypertension, like high blood pressure in your lungs,” said Hoffe. 

“And that the terrifying thing of this is that people with pulmonary artery hypertension usually die of right-sided heart failure within three years.” 

Just recently, Hoffe was one of 10 doctors who spoke in a video calling for an end to “ethically unjustifiable” COVID-19 lockdowns. The video was published by Professionals Against Lockdowns, which was created by Liberty Coalition Canada. 

Health Canada has authorized four COVID-19 injections for adults, all of which are connected to abortion. All of them have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young healthy men. 

After announcing last year that vaccine makers would be shielded from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries, the Canadian federal government launched the nation’s first-ever program designed to financially compensate those who have suffered adverse side effects from any type of vaccine, the Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP).  

According to official Canadian government statistics, as of July 16, there have been a total of 9,615 COVID-19 “vaccine-related” adverse “events” since the first shots were given in late 2020, of which 2,222 were deemed serious. In Canada, 41,526,682 COVID-19 jabs have been administered. 

  blood clots, blood vessels, british columbia, charles hoffe, covid-19, health canada, moderna vaccine, vaccines


Blind-deaf swimmer denied necessary aid, forcing her to withdraw from Tokyo Paralympic Games

'The USOPC has repeatedly denied my reasonable and essential accommodation because of my disability, leaving me no choice,' three-time gold medalist Becca Meyers said.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 8:56 pm EST
Featured Image
Becca Meyers Facebook
Clare Marie Merkowsky

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

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A blind-deaf swimmer withdrew from the Paralympics after the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee denied her a personal care assistant because of new restrictions.  

Becca Meyers suffers from Usher syndrome, affecting both her vision and hearing. Despite her disabilities, Meyers is a three-time gold medalist and six-time Paralympic medalist.  

In an interview with USA Today, Meyers revealed that she had been previously approved by the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) to have her own personal care assistant (PCA). This year, however, she explained that the USOPC is denying “reasonable and essential accommodation for me to be able to compete at the Games,” citing COVID-19 restrictions.  

“Heartbroken to share that I’m withdrawing from the Tokyo Paralympic Games,” she tweeted. “The USOPC has repeatedly denied my reasonable and essential accommodation because of my disability, leaving me no choice.” 

This year, the USOPC will be limiting staff to follow new COVID-19 restrictions. Meyers was told that they will only provide one PCA to assist the athletes. This PCA is responsible for 33 other athletes.  

Meyers asserts that there are eight visually impaired athletes on the swim team and yet no one on the swim staff is specifically certified to work with blind or visually impaired athletes.  

She revealed that this is not the first time that the Paralympics has failed disabled athletes. “At the 2016 Paralympic Games in Rio, I was crippled with fear and anxiety before competition even began,” she recounted.  

Meyers explained that the staff was unprepared to care for a blind-deaf athlete, and she was not given the help she needed. This resulted in her being moved to the hotel where her parents were staying so she could receive the necessary care.  

“How could I possibly set foot in a foreign city, with the numerous restrictions and barriers that COVID-19 has put up and expect to feel safe for two weeks?” she asked.  

“Every single Paralympian has earned the right on this team to compete for our country,” Meyers continued. “Advertisers, brands and networks are all celebrating athletes with disabilities. Showcasing us breaking barriers, defying odds, overcoming adversity.” 

“What you don’t see, though, is that many of those barriers and adverse situations are being created by our own Paralympic structure,” she added. 

Meyers is not the only athlete who faces challenges because of COVID-19 regulations. Kim Gaucher, a member of the Canadian national women’s basketball team, was told that she could not bring her breastfeeding baby to the Olympics. This caused an uproar across social media platforms.  

After the outbreak on social media and numerous appeals from Gaucher, the International Olympic Committee and Japanese organizers are allowing her to attend with her baby.  

Similarly, Meyers’ story is being shared on social media. “This is disgraceful,” EWTN reporter Raymond Arroyo tweeted in response to her story.  

U.S. Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Maryland, condemned the USOPC, saying, “It is disgraceful that she was denied essential and reasonable accommodations, which led to her withdrawal from the Tokyo Olympics. Our Paralympic athletes deserve better.” 

  becca meyers, blind-deaf, covid-19 restrictions, paralympics, swimmer, tokyo olympic games, u.s. olympic and paralympic committee, usher syndrome


LifeSiteNews launches fundraiser to move contemplative nuns from urban hell to rural retreat

Discalced Carmelite nuns at the Monastery of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and St. Joseph are escaping the noise of Brooklyn, New York for the tranquility of Pennsylvania.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 7:54 pm EST
Featured Image
Discalced Carmelite Nuns at the Monastery of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and St. Joseph will relocate from Brooklyn to this donated piece of property in Pennsylvania.
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

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

BROOKLYN, New York, July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — LifeSiteNews has begun a fundraiser for a group of contemplative nuns whose Brooklyn home has become a hell.  

“We have received so many graces here at the Carmel in Brooklyn,” the Mother Superior of the Discalced Carmelite Nuns at the Monastery of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and St. Joseph told LifeSiteNews.    

“However, our location next to Highland Park has proved to be an insurmountable difficulty for our contemplative life,” she continued.  

“The noise and especially the loud music coming from the park — at times it is so loud that even the walls seem to vibrate — has been a real difficulty for our Community over the years. Even with the help of friends and police, there doesn’t seem to be any foreseeable solution to the problem.” 

The Mother Superior told LifeSiteNews that the problem, which includes gang activity, is growing worse and, “with the evidence of drugs, alcohol and satanic rituals, even dangerous.” Young women, potential postulants, have asked to stay with the Brooklyn nuns, but the Sisters believe it would be “impossible to receive them” at that seedy location.  

The 10 Discalced Carmelites, who currently range in age from 30 to the 80s, tried to find a new home within the Diocese of Brooklyn but were unable to find a building that would suit their contemplative life. Providentially, the nuns have been offered a new home: 13 acres of rural property in Pleasant Mount, Pennsylvania. The Catholic family who gave the Sisters the land has already had it consecrated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Discalced Carmelites see in this generous offering a “wonderful opportunity.”  

“When we received the gift of land in Pennsylvania, we saw in this a real answer to prayer and a wonderful opportunity, especially since it would be a suitable place to receive more young vocations to Carmel,” the Mother Superior said.  

Click HERE to help Carmelite nuns move from Brooklyn to rural Pennsylvania! 

The Brooklyn nuns follow the Primitive Rule of Carmel and the primitive Constitutions of their Order, which were written by St. Teresa of Avila herself. Therefore, with the help of an architect friend, the Sisters have designed an “authentic Spanish Carmel.” This will be a monastery like the ones lived in by St. Teresa and her spiritual daughters, with the distinctively “beautiful but austere" Carmelite architecture that can be found in religious houses all over Spain.  

However, a full-sized Spanish monastery cannot be built all at once. Eager to flee the dangers of their disintegrating neighborhood, the Brooklyn Discalced Carmelites are focusing for now on building the first wing of the Pleasant Mount Carmel, which they estimate will cost $2 million.   

“With the simplicity and poverty of our Carmelite charism, we hope to eventually build a Chapel and cloister worthy of the Majesty of God, and which will be set apart as consecrated ground,” the nuns wrote in a fundraising brochure they shared with LifeSiteNews.  

“But even to be able to move by the end of this year to the initial structure of the new Monastery would be a great blessing for our Community.”  

Sadly, the sisters cannot raise money on the building they have been living in for the past 16 years. When the Bishop of Brooklyn asked the Discalced Carmelites to return to Buffalo and obtained for them a building, they were told that the property would be returned to the Diocese if they ever left. The property, a former Franciscan friary and community center, had needed extensive renovations to become suitable for cloistered life. Thus, the Carmelites do not have the means as yet to build their rural refuge. They are depending on their brothers and sisters in Christ, and have promised to pray for their benefactors in perpetuity.  

Asked by LifeSiteNews to share with our readers something of their lives, the Mother Superior stressed their fidelity to the pattern set by their great foundress St. Teresa of Avila.  

“Following the directives and saintly example of Our Holy Mother, St. Teresa of Jesus, and so many holy Carmelites who have followed in her footsteps, we live a life of solitude, silence, prayer, manual labor, penance, and fraternal charity, embracing the evangelical counsels and striving to imitate and  be united with our Lord Jesus in all things,” she wrote.  

“The enclosure wall, the grills, the silence, and the generous gift of self, all help to create a desert (both exteriorly and interiorly) where the bride may encounter her Bridegroom.”  

The goal of the Brooklyn — soon to be Pleasant Mount — Discalced Carmelites is to live out their life as strictly as their foundress envisioned “for the sanctification of priests and for the salvation of souls.” In their liturgical celebrations and prayers, they also remain faithful to the ancient traditions of the Church.  

“We pray the traditional Latin Breviary and the Latin Mass,” Mother Superior told LifeSiteNews.  

“Aware of the great crisis of holiness in the Church, our own insufficiency and the need for more intense prayer and penance, we understand the importance of praying the Office, which includes the recitation of the entire psalter.” 

Mother Superior asserted that petition and praise are the greatest things the Sisters can do for the Church, and that they all love to recite the Divine Office. 

“We normally chant the Office recto tono [a simple, reciting tone], but on Sundays and Solemnities, we chant Lauds and Vespers in the traditional Gregorian Chant, and the Mass is chanted on those days, as well,” she said.  

As this story is published, Lifefunder has already raised more than $1,000 for the new Monastery of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and St. Joseph. Mother Superior expressed thanks for LifeSiteNews readers and benefactors.  

“We are so grateful for the outpouring of prayers and help which we are receiving,” she stated.  

“We know that this is our Lord’s work, and only through Him will anything be accomplished!” 

Click HERE to help Carmelite nuns move from Brooklyn to rural Pennsylvania!

  brooklyn, carmelites, catholic, contemplative nuns, lifefunder


Here’s how to help America’s Frontline Doctors fight college vaccine mandates

AFLDS is looking for plaintiffs to sue universities in several states.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 7:30 pm EST
Featured Image
Matt Lamb

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

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) -- Although one federal judge has ruled that Indiana University in Bloomington can mandate that students take the experimental coronavirus vaccine, the fight to stop mandates continues.

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) is seeking plaintiffs to challenge vaccine mandates in several states and they need your help. James Bopp, the litigation director for AFLDS, represented the group of students that sued the public university.

“AFLDS is looking for college students whose school wants to force them to take the Covid-19 vaccine,” the group said on its “College Student Plaintiff Form.” 

AFLDS is specifically looking for students in California, Colorado, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, or Pennsylvania. 

Applicants are asked to answer questions about past COVID-19 infection, vaccine reactions, and a health condition that could create a concern about an adverse reaction to the experimental shots.

Completion of the form does not obligate anyone to sue their university, but will help the medical freedom organization identify potential plaintiffs and colleges to investigate for possible legal action.

— 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

More than 500 universities have required students, and some also require faculty and staff to be vaccinated as a condition of returning to campus. However, some colleges, such as San Joaquin Delta College in California, reversed their mandates.

A number of doctors have warned universities not to mandate the experimental vaccine.

Harvard University Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff and Stanford medical professor Jay Bhattacharya recently explained why they believe the mandates are unethical.

A mandate for young adults “threatens not only public health but also the future of science,” the pair said.

“University presidents or business leaders should not mandate a medical intervention that could have dire consequences for the health of even a few of the people in their charge,” the pair wrote at The Hill

The two medical professors said the possible adverse reactions outweigh the potential harms of a young adult having a COVID infection, which is one reason they called the coercion “unethical.”

“While we know that COVID vaccines have common but mild adverse reactions, we will not know enough about rare but serious adverse reactions until a few years after vaccine approval,” they explained.

Adverse reactions to vaccines in general and the COVID-19 jabs, include paralyzing Guillian-Barre syndrome, heart inflammation, and 12,313 deaths after vaccination, as of July 19.

An AFLDS report stated that the group is “aware of thousands of reports involving vaginal bleeding, post-menopausal vaginal bleeding, and miscarriages following COVID-19 vaccination as well as anecdotal reports of similar adverse events among those in close contact with the vaccinated.” It cited a LifeSiteNews analysis of the United Kingdom’s vaccine reaction database.

“[I]t is clear a connection between the vaccine and irregular bleeding exists,” the medical freedom organization said.

The Wuhan coronavirus survival rate for young adults without underlying conditions such as obesity or diabetes is around 99.99 percent. Yet, no universities will accept natural immunity in lieu of a vaccine.

  america's frontline doctors, covid-19, indiana university, vaccine mandates


Bishop Schneider addresses clampdown on Traditional Latin Mass

The Pope has the fundamental task of confirming all the faithful and the bishops in the faith. And if the Pope does not do this, we must help him, starting with us bishops, to make clarity, with respectful words.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 6:35 pm EST
Featured Image
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent Follow Jeanne
By Jeanne Smits

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

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Even before the publication of Traditionis Custodes – a horrible antiphrase, since it consists of a methodical destruction of the Church’s liturgical tradition – Archbishop Athanasius Schneider addressed the question of the foreseeable restrictions on the celebration of the Tridentine Mass, which Benedict XVI had affirmed in Summorum Pontificum, in a conference organized in Paris on June 25 by the traditional lay association “Renaissance catholique.” 

The abolition of the 2007 Motu Proprio is deliberately cruel and violent, if not unheard of (things weren’t so good in 1969 either). It seeks, in its spirit, to have the unconditional supporters of the traditional liturgy traced, tested, marked, and isolated out of sight of the people of God so that there will be no more contact between the “trads” and the beneficiaries of the Mass of Paul VI within the dioceses in order to preserve the faithful of the “only” lex orandi of the Catholic Church of Roman Rite from contamination, and it clearly expresses its desire to eradicate the Tridentine virus. 

Bishop Schneider, the courageous auxiliary bishop of St. Mary in Astana, declared that these new measures were to be anticipated (but at the time of his conference no one imagined how brutal they would be). He said, “The faithful as well as priests have the right to a liturgy that is a liturgy of all the saints (...). Therefore, the Holy See does not have the power to suppress a heritage of the whole Church, it is an abuse, it would be an abuse even on the part of a bishop. In this case, you can continue to celebrate the Mass even in this form: It is a form of obedience (...) to all the popes who have celebrated this Mass.” 

“Renaissance catholique,” editor of the French edition of Bishop Schneider’s Christus Vincit, published a statement on Tuesday about the abusive decision by Pope Francis under the title “The Pope of Exclusion.” 

Here below is the complete transcript of Bishop Schneider’s conference (except for the first minutes of his introductory remarks). The first few paragraphs are part of this brief introduction, followed by a question-and-answer session I was asked to conduct, and finally the questions from the audience and Bishop Schneider’s responses. 

Among the topics addressed by Bishop Schneider were the right to uphold the Traditional Latin Mass, the attitude we should adopt when it is becoming so hard to believe that the Catholic Church is “one, holy, catholic and apostolic,” and the temptation of sedevacantism and the temptation of stepping out of the Church to choose orthodoxy. 

Bishop Schneider gave his talk in French. The English translation offered here has not been revised by His Excellency.  

Conference of Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Paris, June 25, 2021 

Introductory remarks by Bishop Schneider 

The structures of evil dominate our time in an almost apocalyptic dimension on a global level. Particularly noteworthy is the state of internal crisis in the Church, which no honest person can deny, because it is already too obvious. Think of these precise observations, which are well known and in which Pope Paul VI honestly described the state of spiritual health of the Church in our time; they remain of great relevance. I quote Paul VI: “It was believed that after the Council the sun would shine on the history of the Church. But instead there came a day of clouds, storms, darkness, searching and uncertainty.” … These are the words of Paul VI. There is no spring. And the Pope added this bold phrase: 

“The smoke of Satan has entered the Temple of God.”  

These words were pronounced on June 29, 1972. Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, the future Pope John Paul II, speaking at the 1976 Eucharistic Congress in Philadelphia, U.S.A., said, “We are now faced with the greatest historical opposition that humanity has ever known. I don’t think that American society as a whole or the Christian community as a whole is fully aware of this. We are now faced with the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, between the Gospel and the anti-gospel, between Christ and the Antichrist. This confrontation is part of the plan of Divine Providence. Therefore, it is part of God’s plan and it is a trial that the Church must accept and face with courage.” These are the words of Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, two years before his papal election. God from all eternity, in His wise and loving plan, has chosen this important but extremely difficult time for us, in which we live, and God wants to reward us with His eternal love. We want to say from the bottom of our hearts to the Lord in these difficult times: "Lord, everything is for you, all my sufferings, all my humiliations, all my tears, all my works, all my love ... Everything is for you. Non nobis, Domine, non nobis. Not to us, not to us, Lord, but to your name give glory.” 

J.S.: Excellency, I am very moved to be here with you. We had frequent exchanges by e-mail during the work of translation of your book Christus Vincit that I carried out, where you checked and paid attention to the precise meaning of every word, since you have a very good command of French. Before I begin this conversation, I would like to pay tribute to Diane Montagna, who carried out this book-length interview with Bishop Schneider, in English. She is an American fellow journalist based in Rome. In this book, she really pushed Bishop Schneider to the edge. She really asked all the questions, she dug deep, she came back to her questions, she didn’t avoid any difficult subject and I think Bishop Schneider didn’t avoid any controversial subject either. You speak of Freemasonry, which is quite classic, as well as of Islam or of the Society of Saint Pius X, and so we have an overall vision of the Church which is very lucid and at the same time, as you have just shown, full of hope. The first question I wanted to ask you concerns the main thread of the book, the quotation from Saint Matthew (XXIV, 29): “The sun shall be darkened, the moon shall no longer give her light, and the stars shall fall from Heaven.” Obviously this scares us, I won’t conceal that! I wonder if the Apocalypse is actually going to fall on our heads in the near future. And secondly, you have just quoted Cardinal Wojtyla who said in Philadelphia that the Church must respond, must face up to the ordeal with courage, but there are many of us who wonder where the Church’s courage is today. How is it possible that we are in such bad times, when at the same time, as you said, sensible people see what is going on. Can you go into this reflection a little more deeply? 

Bishop Schneider: A person who believes, who has faith, should never be afraid. Our faith should be strong, convincing. Faith is the gift of God, the divine life of our soul. If the Lord is with us, who is against us? Even if the apocalyptic time comes, the Lord will always be with us, we have the Lord, in the faith of our heart. He said, "I am with you until the end of the world." He has remained with us especially in the Eucharist, in the tabernacle, in Holy Communion, and even if we have to enter the time of the catacombs again, perhaps, like the first Christians, as I had the privilege of living also in the catacombs during my childhood under the Soviet Union, this time will always be a time of abundant graces. And if Divine Providence grants us these graces, these trials, Divine Providence, Divine Goodness will always give us all the strength we need to face these difficult, even almost apocalyptic times. This is the first thing. 

Regarding what Cardinal Karol Wojtyla said about the Church today having to face with courage the confrontation of the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel and the anti-Gospel, perhaps Cardinal Wojtyla thought in 1976 that this confrontation would be between the Church and the enemies of the Church, who are outside the Church. But I think now we have the confrontation of a Church against a Church within, in the midst of the life of the Church. We have already seen this phenomenon in the past years, when we saw virtually the introduction of divorce in the Church through the text Amoris Laetitia, which is very ambiguous. So it’s an anti-gospel; it’s against what Jesus said about marriage. And then there are the forms of relativism that we have seen ... There are very serious signs of the acceptance of idols, even in the Vatican during the Amazon synod, these signs showing that it was not the Gospel. Our Lord Jesus Christ would never have accepted to worship an idol. The apostles of “Mother Earth” – they were called by another name – collaborated with the whole abortion industry, with the fetus industry, and with close collaboration. So these are just a few examples where we can see the confrontation that Cardinal Wojtyla was already talking about, but now we are in the middle of this confrontation. At the same time, we must always have the certainty of Christ’s victory, and for this reason in the book Christus Vincit, the main theme is always the victory of Christ and of the Catholic faith. 

J.S.: I would like to come back to one of your expressions: you spoke of the “privilege” of the catacombs, you spoke of the “gift” of this trial that the Church is going through, and I would like to say to you, perhaps in the name of those who are listening to us this evening: we are all the same in confusion, we are in a form of incomprehension in front of what is happening, we feel to a certain extent that we have a responsibility to fight this, but we also see that never have Catholics, in their majority, been so poorly instructed in their faith. So how is it possible that this trial is coming to us now, when there is such unpreparedness within the Church, and what should we do about it? 

Bishop Schneider: This situation has been prepared for decades, it did not just happen yesterday. It is a process of already 50 years, from the time of the Council, when the tendency of the leaders of the Church was rather to take care of temporal, corporal things, and not the primacy of eternal things, of the truth. And so there was as a consequence in the catechesis, in the formation of the priests, in the seminaries, a fundamental defect and a lack of the fundamental doctrine, of the doctrine of the faith. In the seminaries, in catechism, in the schools, dialogue was promoted: the relativist mentality according to which all religions are on the same level and go together towards God by different ways. But this is false, it is against the Gospel! It is a denial of the Gospel, if we say that all religions are almost on the same level. And so you are right, since these decades have had the effect of spreading a very deep ignorance in Catholic circles and among priests. But at the same time we can see now the thirst of young people for truth, clarity, certainty, this need of our heart. It is a need that God has given us: the certainty of truth, and this desire for certainty. And now we can see in young people the desire to have integrity, the fullness also of divine worship, of the Holy Mass, of life and doctrine. For this reason, I can see a sign of hope, however small, that we must encourage and transmit. I think it is a fundamental task to teach a clear catechism that is 100 percent Catholic. Take the old catechisms, please; teach the children, the youth, and even us, the adults. Why not take a children’s catechism and repeat the eternal truths? I consider the transmission of the doctrine of faith a very important task. 

J.S.: We are in a way invited, called to make up for the shortcomings of authority. In your book you show that this situation is not entirely new. How can we justify saying that such and such a bishop, my bishop, my parish priest, may be teaching false things, is an admirer of the Pachamama … Do we have the right, the duty to react, and how can we justify that in a hierarchical society like the Church? 

Bishop Schneider: Of course we have this right, because the Church is not a dictatorship. The Church is a family, which is indeed hierarchical. And the father, the fatherhood, the children, are also spiritual. And in a family there is also the care for the common, spiritual good of the church; this care also concerns the faithful, because if the shepherd begins to give the sheep bad things, they should demand please to be given the true things, for nourishment. Because this is your task, these are the duties that God has given you: you must give us the divine food, not your new and ideological ideas. And for this reason, I think that, with respect, the faithful have the duty to demand this from the hierarchy; the faithful have the right to a clear, integral doctrine. And if the priest, the bishop, or the pope does not give them a clear doctrine, they should say: we have the right, give us this, please, we are hungry for doctrine, will you leave us without food, without bread? This is a fundamental demand of the faithful. I repeat, with respect. This is part of the hierarchical structure, because the Church is not a human organization, a political party, a political dictatorship, where everyone is afraid of the leader. No, we are a family. And in a family we can ask for our right too, with respect. This is not a contract; this is what the exceptional situation requires, this situation where the faithful should make admonitions or in some way complaints to the hierarchy so that it gives a clear doctrine and a dignified liturgy. 

This exceptional situation is rare in the history of the Church, but there was already one in the 4th century with the Arian crisis, and now we are witnessing a similar situation. But this situation is only temporary. You also have the privilege, in a very difficult situation, of testifying to your fidelity, to your baptismal faith and to the faith of your ancestors, the faith of the saints whom you know, of testifying to this faith even before leaders of the hierarchy who have perhaps partially lost the faith, to help, to remind the shepherds that it is necessary to return to the purity of the faith. Therefore you do a great meritorious work before God when you faithfully keep your faith, even in the face of this sad situation, when part of the hierarchy is starting to deny the faith. 

J.S.: The next phases in the Church, or at least what is being organized in Rome, aim at an ever greater synodality. This includes giving a voice to the faithful, which is not without paradox after what you have just said. In your book, you have very harsh words for the current organization of the Church, where episcopal meetings, synods, follow one another, often very expensive because their organization is costly, and where we end up with declarations that nobody reads. I would like to ask you: do you think that we have reached a kind of desire for democracy in the Church, but to the exclusion of those who want the truth? 

Bishop Schneider: Yes, exactly. The Church is a democracy of saints. So we must consult the saints who lived before us, the holy Doctors of the Church, the holy Fathers of the Church, and let the voice of the Church of all time speak. The purpose of a synod is to strengthen the faith, to clarify the faith, the discipline of the Church, and sanctity of life. That is the purpose of a synod. A good synod would be one in which the pope invites the faithful of “Renaissance catholique,” of the Society of St. Pius X, of the Ecclesia Dei communities, of the laity, to make proposals asking to return to the faith and liturgy and the moral life of all times. This would be a good synod. But it seems that the communities and people of your spirit, the spirit of “Renaissance catholique,” will not have a voice in this synod. But you have a voice before God. That is better. That is more effective. And you have the means: your prayer, your sacrifices and your silent apostolate, where you live, and the priests, where they work. I have the impression that this method of the synodal way is the means to further Protestantize the life of the Church, and to make the opinion of the Church more relativistic, unclear, that is to say, to increase the confusion, the state of uncertainty. We must pray that God, that divine intervention helps us, that this synod, which should take place in 2023, does not take place, perhaps by a divine intervention, because the Church is in the hands of God. 

J.S.: I think you have already partly answered the question I was going to ask you, but I’ll ask it anyway: sometimes we are tempted to ask ourselves how we can still have faith in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church in the current situation. I was talking recently with a friend who has suffered through the Church and who told me she was re-reading St. Catherine of Siena and all the beautiful things she said about the Church: it is one and holy, but also “the leprous bride of Christ.” How can we reconcile this one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church, which we love and which we must love, with what we see before our eyes? What practical advice would you give to preserve and strengthen our faith? 

Bishop Schneider: The Church is also a mystery. Mysterium: mystery, supernatural. And at the same time it is a human society. It is a special, unique organization, which is divine and human. And sometimes in this body of the Church evil increases even among the representatives of the hierarchy, and good is diminished, and truth, and holiness - as in the Gospel, where Our Lord spoke of those fields where there are both good grain and tares. So there is always a mixture in the Church. This mystery of the mixture, of evil and good, will remain until the end of the world. Sometimes the evil is more abundant, sometimes less. Now we live in a situation where it seems that the weeds dominate and the good seed is very much reduced. But it exists, it has not disappeared. It exists, but diminished. It is a great hope: to believe that the Church will always remain holy, apostolic, even in a diminished number. For example, in the fourth century, during the Arian crisis, almost the entire episcopate of the Church accepted the politics of heresy, or semi-heresy. Only a few bishops remained faithful: St. Athanasius, St. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Basil... Imagine the whole episcopate accepting the politically correct, the heresy! Pope Liber was very weak, and he even excommunicated Saint Athanasius. So there was darkness in the Church. But the faith triumphed among the faithful, among you, the faithful. It was a miracle. And the faithful kept the Church that lived on within souls: the Holy, Apostolic Church lived in the souls of the faithful and in the souls of the priests and the bishops so few. I think the situation is similar today. The Church continues to be holy, apostolic, catholic, in every catholic soul – layperson, priest or bishop – who faithfully keeps the integrity of the faith and of the Christian life. 

J.S.: Excellency, you explain in your book that your name, Athanasius, was given to you – it is a religious name. Did you think when you received it that it was destined for a particular struggle? 

Bishop Schneider: Never. Absolutely never. It was impossible for me. Even the name Athanasius was, to me, completely strange. I didn’t know why I was given the name Athanasius; I knew the life of St. Athanasius, but I was a simple priest, and I could never imagine when I became a priest that one day I would become a bishop and have to fight a battle sometimes similar to that of St. Athanasius, who even had to resist the Holy Father at times, to admonish the Pope as I did with the Abu Dhabi commentary on diversity of religions. I had to admonish the Pope in facie, face to face, personally, with respect, but I had to resist and admonish. But it was for the love of the Church that I did it, for the love of the Pope. That’s important: the intention. It would be easier for me to say nothing to the Pope. But my conscience would not allow me to do so. I should live like Saint Athanasius. Saint Athanasius said these words to another bishop of his time, a friendly bishop: “We must not serve our time, we must serve God.” This is our purpose, our task. So I think that Divine Providence guides us and we must live only for truth and for eternity. 

J.S.: I was just going to ask you about that: you spoke about your request for clarification to the Pope about the Abu Dhabi document, which claims that the diversity of religions was willed by God in His wisdom, and you obtained an answer that could considered to be satisfactory, saying that it was a “permissive will” of God. But that response did not extend to the whole Church and on the whole the faithful are faced with a pope who – not all the time but quite often – would seem to teach things that are totally contrary to what we believe. And my question is perhaps a bit sharp: what can we do to continue to love the pope and obey his authority as Christ’s vicar? 

Bishop Schneider: We must always see the ministry of the Pope with the eyes of faith. Not with sentimentality. The Pope has the fundamental task of confirming all the faithful and the bishops in the faith. And if the Pope does not do this, we must help him, starting with us bishops, to make clarity, with respectful words. We even have examples, like that of St. Catherine of Siena. She wrote many letters to the Pope of her time, so that he would return from Avignon to Rome, because this situation was to the detriment of the Church. One letter that St. Catherine wrote was to the Pope, I think it was Urban VI, who was very problematic. She admonished this Pope to change his attitude, because his behavior was to the detriment of the Church. She wrote: Most Holy Father, you are the sweet Christ on earth, I am your loving and obedient daughter; but if you don’t convert, give up the papacy, give up your task. “Your loving and obedient daughter”… She continued to love the Pope, but she gave admonitions for love of the Pope, because perhaps, renouncing the Papacy would mean for the Pope to save his soul before God, before the judgment of God. It’s a gesture of love for one’s neighbor. 

But unfortunately, as time has gone by – I think in particular of the last two centuries – there has been even until today a phenomenon that many people now call papolatry, the adoration of the Pope almost: to consider the Pope as God, who can never make a mistake. This is wrong. This attitude towards the Pope has never existed in the Church. The Pope is human, the Pope is not the good God. We have to reform this, it is unhealthy. The Pope is only a vicar, a serving minister, and also a sinner. Only on special and rare occasions does he have the charism of infallibility. But sometimes, as history has shown, the Pope has made mistakes, serious mistakes, moral, political … rarely doctrinal, thanks to God. But it is the same situation now. We can tell them to the Pope, with love, and make filial, fraternal admonitions. As a bishop, I have the task of helping the Pope, as colleagues, as in a collegiality. So the Pope is not a king. The Pope cannot say: I am the Church, as Louis XIV said: I am the State! The Church is not the private property of the Pope. He is only an administrator, a vicar. And we must help the Holy Father, with our prayers, our penances, our atonements, and sometimes respectful admonitions. 

J.S.: This is ultimately opening up perspectives. But in the contacts I have with readers, I see that there is a sedevacantist temptation in the present situation. And I would very much like you to tell us how to fight it: should we fight it? How can we fight it? This temptation seems to me to be very present right now. 

Bishop Schneider: Do you know what the root of sedevacantism is? It is exactly papolatry, the fact of divinizing the pope. So it is a false vision of these sedevacantist faithful and priests, according to which the Pope is almost the good God, the Pope can never make mistakes, and therefore if a Pope has defects, as was the case after the Council, with the new Mass, then in Assisi, and now with the phenomenon we know, Amoris Laetitia, Pachamama, Abu Dhabi, etc., then he is no longer Pope, because the Pope cannot have any defects. He is the good Lord. If a Pope shows some weaknesses, serious ones, like after the Council, regarding the liturgy, regarding the doctrine, his faithful say that now he is not Pope anymore: sede vacantia. And we should wait for God to give us again a divine pope, completely holy, completely infallible. But this is wrong! It is a completely un-Catholic view. This is, I think, the deep, doctrinal, psychological root of the thinking of these faithful. And we have to help these faithful, to correct this completely unrealistic attitude that also contradicts the history of the Church. I think another root is that these faithful are scandalized, and reject the Cross. We have to carry the cross of a difficult Pope, of a Pope who makes confusion. This is the heaviest cross, and we have to carry this cross. I think that these sedevacantist faithful do not want to carry this cross, this suffering, for the Church, to support such an ecclesiastical superior as Supreme Pastor. So we need to have a supernatural vision. 

J.S.: We were talking earlier, Bishop Schneider, before this meeting, about a pope who had bought his office. I would like you to share this anecdote because there is a lot of talk about the election of Pope Francis having been rendered invalid by various circumstances, by certain canonical laws. If you could tell us that, I think it would be very enlightening. 

Bishop Schneider: I think that in general it is very beneficial to know the history of the Church and the history of the papacy. It is very important for our time. For example, in the 11th century, when there was still the phenomenon of the Saeculum obscurum, the Dark Ages, when the papacy was occupied by groups of mafias, immoral groups, there were forces for the renewal of the Church. Hildebrandt, the future Pope Gregory VII, a Benedictine abbot in Rome, was the soul of a group of cardinals working for a true reform of the Church, and after his death, these times were called the “Gregorian reform.” He saw that the Pope was a gravely immoral person, who was giving public scandals that were unbearable. There was a good cardinal, and Abbot Hildebrandt, who had heard that this pope loved money very much and was ready to sell the papacy for money, had combined this thing for the good of the Church: to remove this immoral pope. He advised this cardinal to buy the pontificate for a large sum of money from this corrupt Pope. And so the Pope sold his papacy to this good cardinal, who became Pope Gregory VI and appointed Hildebrandt cardinal, and so he was able to do a good job of reforming the Church. It was canonically invalid, since it was simony. But the Church has always considered this Pope Gregory VI as valid, even though he became Pope by simony, by buying his office. 

J.S.: Excellency, your book, when I translated it and read it very carefully, seemed to me to be programmatic. I don’t think you actually wanted to present a platform as a candidate, but in any case you sought to explain how the Church can recover its holiness, and your message is ultimately a message of hope. In this program that you describe by showing how to appoint good bishops, what points should be stressed? Could you describe somewhat the way out of this crisis as you see it? 

Bishop Schneider: It all depends on good people being strategically put in place: good, competent people. This has always been the method during the crises of the church. We must have leaders who are people of integrity, people of faith. I think that the reform of the Church should indeed begin in the Holy See, with a reformed papacy, renewed in the spirit of the Martyr Popes, of Christ, without fear, without an inferiority complex before the world. The Church needs this kind of pope, who can appoint bishops, cardinals, of the same spirit. It is logical. A good bishop can transform his whole diocese for generations. I had this experience in Brazil. My bishop was a very strong Catholic in the midst of Liberation theology; he renewed the whole diocese with a well-formed clergy, with faithful, with churches, and he restored communion on the knees and on the tongue. The whole diocese and the clergy were renewed. It was an example. Imagine if all the dioceses in France were like that, with such bishops. Courageous bishops, strong in prayer, like apostles. The whole of France would change. And then the priests! We would have new clergy, and families. And for this reason, we must renew the episcopate, of course. Because you, the faithful, already have the faith and you are preparing the ground. God is preparing the ground with you, little faithful. And then will come the time when Divine Providence will again give us strong bishops, like St. Hilary of Poitiers, St. Martin of Tours, Cardinal Pius of Poitiers, and so on. There are great figures of the episcopate in France and in other countries, like Cardinal von Galen, at the time of Nazism ... 

So there is hope, we have to work, but of course it is not enough, it is very necessary that from the Holy See, a clear document emanates, a kind of Syllabus, or a kind of very precise profession of faith, looking at the common errors of our time, with even threats of excommunication, as there have always been, and that Our Lord created as a spiritual doctor. It is therefore necessary to have good appointments, and the profession of faith. 

J.S.: At the end of your book, you published a text by St. Peter Julien Eymard, “The Triumph of the Church through the Holy Eucharist,” and this is one of the questions that Diane Montagna asked you a little earlier. She said, “She [the Church] must return to her First Love?" And you answered, in the book: “To Eucharistic love.” What exactly is the place of this Eucharistic love in the program you are giving to the faithful tonight to work for the victory of Christ? 

Bishop Schneider: The Eucharist is the heart of the Church. The Church is a mystical body, not a human organization, nor a political one. The Church is the mystical body of Christ, and every body has a heart: here the heart is the Eucharist. Now, for decades, we have been witnessing a heart disease, a Eucharistic heart disease, which I call cardiastenia eucharistica, a kind of weakness of the Eucharistic heart, because of the widespread forms of desecration, sacrilege, outrage of our Lord in the small consecrated host, even in the small particles that fall during communion, because of communion in the hand. Nobody can deny it, it is obvious that Our Lord falls on the ground. This is for me the deepest wound in the life of the Church. And for this reason we must restore and re-establish all the dignity, the sublimity, of the Eucharistic cult, especially during the distribution of Holy Communion and the celebration of Holy Mass, which is the principal, vital act of the Church: the sacrifice of the Cross that is now present on our altars. And so we must renew the mode of celebration of the Christocentric, theocentric Mass, with sacredness: to give Jesus again the centrality of the Mass in the mode of celebration and at the moment of Holy Communion. And on this will depend again the renewed life of the Church. 

J.S.: There is a chapter toward the end of your book that touched me immensely, the one about the guardian angels for whom you have a very special veneration – and we could talk here about how this is linked to your order, the Canons regular of the Holy Cross. I would appreciate it very much if you were to tell us about the guardian angels so that in times that are difficult, we may be prompted to lean on them. 

Bishop Schneider: The world of angels is the supernatural world par excellence. One root of the spiritual illness of the Church is the loss, the lack of supernatural vision. The Church has turned to the temporal, to the natural, and has lost the vision of a part of the supernatural, the primacy of the supernatural. And the world of angels is the supernatural world par excellence. They are always before the presence of God. The first task of the angels is the worship of God. The whole essence of angels says: God first, and only God. This is the whole meaning of angels. Everything for God, for the worship of God. Turned completely to God, that is the essence of the angel. And it is our task, that of the Church and men, to be turned towards God always. Sin consists in the fact that we are not turned towards God, sin turns us towards ourselves, towards selfishness. And for this reason I stress the devotion, the awareness of the existence of the angels that God has given us, sent us, as our companions, as our brothers who always accompany us in our first task of worshipping God, of being turned towards the supernatural, towards eternity. And then each of us has his own guardian angel. What generosity! What a privilege God gives us! Each one of us has a special guardian angel, just for us. This guardian angel will never leave you, day and night, he will always be with you, personally. And he prays, he worships God in our place, always. What a good brother, what a good friend, our best friend! 

And so the whole Church should again be more aware of the existence, the presence, and the work, the apparitions of the holy angels. The angels have as another task to fight against the evil spirits, the fallen angels. And the Church militant, we live every day of our battles against sin, against the devil, against temptation, and we must invoke the holy angels to fight with us. We are soldiers of Christ, and the angels accompany us. The moment of spiritual warfare is very important, and the guardian angels, and St. Michael and the other angels remind us of this reality that we must fight. And one day we will all be together with the angels for all eternity, forming a family of God. But now already on earth, you know that in every Mass at the end of the preface, before the Sanctus, the Church says: and with all the angels we sing “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus,” to proclaim the holiness of God. 

J.S.: Here is my last question before those of the audience: tell us about the snowdrops and the salmon. 

Bishop Schneider: Yes, I chose this flower, which I like very much, because these snowdrops already announce the arrival of spring, still in the time of winter, but already they say the nearness of spring. And the snowdrop pierces the snow. There is already a flower, but in the middle of the snow. And you, the little faithful, the Catholic families, the Catholic children, the Catholic youth, the young priests – also the elderly priests! – you are the snowdrops in the fields still covered with snow, but you announce the coming of spring. In German we say “Schneeglöckchen,” i.e. the snow bells, which already sound the coming of spring. The other image is the salmon, the fish. It is the fish of the bishops, an episcopal symbol, because the salmon swims against the current. So the task of the bishops today is to swim against the current. That’s why we need many snowdrops and many salmon. 

Questions from the audience were collated and read to Bishop Schneider. 

The first questions concern Vatican II. 

“In this time of the European Cup of Nations, can we say ‘Vatican 2 - Church nil?” 

One person asks, “If the pre-Vatican II Church failed to prevent the Council, despite the warnings of the Virgin Mary and the Archangel St. Michael to Pope Leo XIII, which church can we put in the place of Vatican II, the same one? Another one?” 

Another person wrote, “Bishop Schneider, you said that there should not be another Vatican II Council, but a second Council of Trent, can you elaborate on this idea?” 

First of all, divine providence allowed the Second Vatican Council, we must accept this fact. Even if this event historically brought more disadvantages to the whole Church, God can still make a negative thing, an evil, a good, an even greater good. And we can see that even during the crises after the Council, and now, God has awakened, called up heroic figures, professions of faith, and testimonies of faith. And, secondly, we need a Council of Trent II, simply for the clarity, the need to establish again the clarity of the doctrine and the discipline of the Church. I hope that one day a kind of Council of Trent II will come, not necessarily in the city of Trent, but in the spirit of the Council of Trent. 

“Your Excellency, do you have any contact with Archbishop Vigano and what do you think of his positions on the Second Vatican Council? I gather that you are not in a process of absolute rejection of Vatican II but of clarification, and this is what you say in your book.” 


On the subject of the traditional Mass, there are several questions. 

Firstly, are you familiar with the case of Dijon, where the Fraternity of St. Peter is being dismissed by the bishop, Bishop Minnerath? Other traditional communities are experiencing vexations on the part of their bishops, and this is also a theme that has been set before you. 

One question asks: “If the Motu proprio Summorum pontificum were to be suppressed, what attitude should Ecclesia Dei communities who wish to remain faithful to the extraordinary form of the Mass adopt? Should they privilege obedience, or should they enter into resistance? For the moment, this does not seem to be aimed at Ecclesia Dei communities, but if so, what attitude do you recommend?” 

For the moment these are simply hypotheses. It does not seem that the Holy See will abolish Summorum Pontificum, I would consider that very unreal, not realistic. But perhaps there will be a limitation on the use of Summorum Pontificum. In this case, I think that you, the faithful and the priests, have the right to a liturgy that is the liturgy of all the saints, almost of all times. So in this case the Holy See does not have the right to suppress a heritage of the whole Church. That would be an abuse, even on the part of a bishop. In this case, you can continue to celebrate the Mass, formally in disobedience, but you will be in obedience to the Church of all times, to all the popes who have celebrated this Mass. And continue with respect to pray for this bishop or for the pope. But find some forms perhaps of catacomb Masses, of clandestine Masses. But always with the spirit “sentire cum Ecclesia,” with a love for the Church and for souls. So it would be a service to the whole Church. The Church is not just now, the Church is of all times. 

A couple of questions, again general: 

"What do you think about the temptation to become Orthodox of the Moscow Patriarchate?" 

"What about the errors of the Popes and the dogma of infallibility, mainly for the Popes of the 20th and 21st centuries?" 

There is a true concern about the Church, there has been a lot of talk about it: what do you think about this temptation to become Orthodox? 

It is very false, because becoming Orthodox is worse than becoming sedevacantist. Because they reject the faith, the dogma of the primacy of Peter. This is a Gospel truth, it is a truth of dogma. Sedevacantism does not reject the dogma, it only declares, in an arbitrary way, the seat of Peter vacant, but this is unrealistic. The Orthodox, however, reject the dogma, and for this reason we cannot go in that direction, even to have a beautiful liturgy. You know that the Orthodox Church admits divorce. Do you want to have a church with divorce? You can get married, even in church, in the Orthodox Church: a second time, a third time. But only three times, not four. The second marriage, and perhaps the third, is called a penitential marriage. 

The rite is penitential: the father blesses couples who are de facto adulterers, with a somewhat penitential rite. So it’s a contradiction, and it’s very serious. There is no clear magisterium on contraception either, there is no universal magisterium. So it is problematic. The Orthodox Church has many values, I have many Orthodox friends, even bishops and priests and faithful, they have good values, a liturgy, sacredness, humility, reverence, fasting, penance, and that is good. But that is not all. 

On the Mass and the Eucharistic celebration, there are several questions: 

“Why does Pope Francis denounce ‘rigid priests’? Who is he targeting? Why this obsession?” Now, I don’t think you can answer for the Pope, but I submit the point. 

Another question that comes from a priest: “A few years ago, Cardinal Sarah invited all priests, especially young priests, to celebrate the first Sunday of Advent facing the Lord. Among those who were convinced, how many were able to do so? The Church violates priests and seminarians continuously. Do you think it would be useful to fill the ecclesiastical courts with complaints to force the Church to return to its law and doctrine? The Pope Emeritus said not to oppose the abuse of power is to become an accomplice.” 

Still on the same theme: “Could you, Monsignor, admonish the Archbishop of Paris and all our bishops concerning the Holy Communion they want to be given in the hand? Thank you for what you are.” 

I am not able, as part of my own task, to admonish the bishop of Paris, because I am not the pope. Only the Pope, the superior, can do that. I can, if he asks me, give him fraternal advice, but not publicly, and in a respectful way. But perhaps you can send my book, especially on communion in the hand, to these French bishops. 

[Jean-Pierre Maugendre’s intervention: This has been done, all the bishops of France have received Bishop Schneider’s book. About 10 of them have kindly acknowledged receipt, and some of these have committed themselves to read it]. 

You can, I think, launch an initiative of the faithful, perhaps on behalf of the youth, to ask the Pope, the Holy See, to guarantee the right of every faithful to receive communion on the lips, even during the so-called pandemic, because all sanitary measures can be respected, and therefore there is no objective, scientific reason not to do do. For this reason you can make a request, with evidence from specialists, and send it to Rome to guarantee your rights. For the Mass, there is also another procedure to allow all priests to celebrate the Mass, even the new Mass, towards God. 

Should we take these matters to the ecclesiastical courts? 

Go to the Holy See, because that is the source. From there must come an order, an orientation. 

Now a question about the Church in America and President Biden. “We know that there is a lot of controversy at the moment, in particular in projects and reflections of the American bishops, which aim at refusing communion to President Joe Biden who declares himself Catholic and at the same time pro-abortion. Some say that this is a strictly political matter. How can a Catholic feel he is in a state of grace allowing him to receive Communion while at the same time declaring himself to be pro-abortion, and how can such an issue come to divide the Church?” 

This is proof that a part of the bishops have lost some faith in the importance of the Eucharist. What is the Eucharist? It is Our Lord, the immense holiness of God, and therefore they have also lost faith in the inestimable greatness of the Eucharist. And they have forgotten the Holy Scripture that tells us: whoever eats the body of the Lord unworthily, eats his judgment. So these bishops, who admit Biden or other politicians who promote abortion, to Holy Communion, these bishops are cruel. They are letting these souls go to waste and eat the judgment of God. This is a very irresponsible thing, a great sin against the love of our neighbor. And so the other bishops who do not allow communion for Biden have a true love for Biden, for Biden’s soul, so that he does not eat the divine judgment. So there are two things, the loss of faith of these bishops in the sanctity of Holy Communion, and the danger of receiving Holy Communion in an objectively unworthy state. They forget that this gesture of admitting these people publicly is at the same time saying that we implicitly approve of the fact that politicians can promote abortion. This is a very irresponsible pastoral attitude. 

There are two questions left. 

The first one is: "Do you see other bishops joining your ideas, the current that you embody, or does this current remain isolated?" 

I don’t have contact with all the bishops, but some of course have the same concern, the same spirit, but a large part of the bishops unfortunately, even good bishops, are intimidated. They prefer to keep silent for personal reasons or to preserve their ecclesiastical career, or because of a kind of papalism, unhealthy papolatry, or various other reasons. But numbers are not important in the reign of God. 

And the last question: 

Bishop Schneider, in Christus Vincit you mention the question of Our Lady of Fatima, her message, her requests, the consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, you express doubts as to whether this consecration was done in full in the way Our Lady wanted. A participant asks, “Appealing to the Pope to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is a project of a small group in France, would you be willing to support this supernatural initiative?” 

Yes, I am ready. I think it is necessary. But it is in God’s hands. Of course a full, explicit consecration will bring many graces to our world and to the Church, and to Russia and the whole world, as Our Lady promised. Therefore, we must pray, we must take steps, so that the Pope will make the full and explicit consecration, and to ask Our Lady for the Triumph of her maternal and Immaculate Heart.

  athanasius schneider, catholic, motu proprio, pope francis, traditional latin mass, traditionis custodes


‘He lied to Congress’: Sen. Rand Paul announces criminal referral to DOJ for Fauci

‘It’s a dance,’ Republican Senator Rand Paul told Dr. Anthony Fauci, ‘and you’re dancing around this because you’re trying to obscure responsibility for 4 million people dying around the world from a pandemic.’
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 5:03 pm EST
Featured Image
C-SPAN / screenshot
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — After an explosive exchange in which Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) grilled White House COVID czar Dr. Anthony Fauci about his department’s alleged funding of dangerous gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China, the Kentucky senator announced he is making a criminal referral to the Department of Justice against Fauci, who he said “lied to Congress.”  

Sen. Paul made the announcement on Fox News, telling talk show host Sean Hannity Tuesday night, “I will be sending a letter to the Department of Justice asking for a criminal referral because he has lied to Congress.” 

The news comes after a contentious back-and-forth between Paul and Fauci during a congressional hearing Tuesday which went viral. 

During the heated hearing Sen. Paul, an ophthalmologist who graduated from Duke University’s School of Medicine, contended that Fauci was obfuscating a clear record connecting funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) with gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses undertaken at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China. 

Amid the intense line of questioning Fauci appeared visibly frazzled, while Paul was seen to casually take a sip of water after Fauci claimed that “If anyone is lying, it is you.” 

Sen. Paul began his questioning by reminding Fauci that “Section of the US Criminal Code creates a felony and a five-year penalty for lying to Congress.” 

“On your last trip to our committee on May 11th, you stated that the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And yet, gain of function research was done entirely in the Wuhan Institute [of Virology] by Dr. Shi and was funded by the NIH,” the senator said. 

Paul cited Dr. Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist from Rutgers University, who according to Paul said “‘the Wuhan lab used NIH funding to construct novel chimeric SARS related to coronaviruses able to infect human cells and laboratory animals. This is high risk research that creates new potential pandemic pathogens… that exist only in the lab, not in nature.’” 

The Kentucky senator asked that a Wuhan virology paper entitled “Discovery of a Rich Gene Pool of Bat SARS Related Coronaviruses” be delivered to Dr. Fauci.  

The paper credits the NIH for helping fund its research, which Sen. Paul said “combined genetic information from different coronaviruses that infect animals, but not humans, to create novel artificial viruses able to infect human cells.”  

Sen. Paul alleged that the research “fits the definition… that the NIH said was subject to the pause in 2014 to 2017, a pause in funding on gain of function.” 

“Dr. Fauci,” Paul continued, “knowing that it is a crime to lie to Congress, do you wish to retract your statement of May 11th, where you claimed that the NIH never funded gain of function research in Wuhan?”  

“I have never lied before the Congress, and I do not retract that statement,” Fauci said. “This paper that you were referring to was judged by qualified staff up and down the chain as not being gain of function. What was -” 

“You take an animal virus and you increase its transmissibility to humans,” Sen. Paul interrupted. “You’re saying that’s not gain of function?” 

Fauci replied that the research was not “gain-of-function” and told Sen. Paul “you do not know what you are talking about.” 

Interrupting Fauci again, Sen. Paul said that by the NIH’s own definition, “scientific research that increases the transmissibility among mammals is ‘gain of function.’” 

“They took animal viruses that only occur in animals, and they increased their transmissibility to humans,” Paul said. “How you can say that is not gain of function –” 

“It is not,” Fauci interrupted. 

“It’s a dance,” said Paul, “and you’re dancing around this because you’re trying to obscure responsibility for 4 million people dying around the world from a pandemic.” 

“Well, now you’re getting into something,” Fauci responded, claiming that the senator was suggesting that through its grant awarded from EcoHealth Alliance to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), the NIH was responsible for creating SARS-CoV-2. 

“We don’t know,” answered Sen. Paul. “We don’t know that it didn’t come from the lab, but all the evidence is pointing that it came from the lab, and there will be responsibility for those who funded the lab, including yourself.” 

Fauci then accused Paul of lying, saying “I totally resent the lie that you are now propagating, senator, because if you look at the viruses that were used in the experiments that were given in the annual reports that were published in the literature, it is molecularly impossible…” 

“No one is saying that those viruses caused the pandemic,” Paul came back. “What we’re alleging is the gain of function research was going on in that lab and NIH funded it. You can’t get away from it. It meets your definition and you are obfuscating the truth.” 

Sen. Paul’s allotted time expired, and Fauci was given the last word. Pointing his finger at Sen. Paul, Fauci, who appeared to be physically shaking, said “If anyone is lying it is you.” 

Sen. Paul’s allegations against Fauci in the tense questioning received the support of congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH), who had slammed Fauci’s draconian COVID-19 guidance in April, asking the public health official “when do Americans get their freedom back?” 

On Wednesday Rep. Jordan publicly agreed with Paul, tweeting out July 21 simply: “Fauci lied.” 

Washington Post reporter Josh Rogin also appeared to side with Paul, saying “Hey guys, @RandPaul was right and Fauci was wrong. The NIH was funding gain of function research in Wuhan but NIH pretended it didn't meet their "gain of function" definition to avoid their own oversight mechanism. SorryNotSorry if that doesn't fit your favorite narrative.” 

Meanwhile Jenna Ellis, a lawyer and member of former president Donald Trump’s legal team, called Rand Paul a “national treasure,” adding that people are “TIRED OF THE LIES.”. 

In an interview with podcast host Brad Polumbo July 21, Sen. Paul said he believes Fauci is “okay with lying because he thinks the lie is for the betterment of mankind. 

According to Paul, Fauci’s attitude is “predictable as an elitist.”  

The senator added that “people on the Left believe they know better than you and they think that the common man’s too stupid to make their own decisions, so these decisions need to be made by their betters. And I truly think that he believes that he knows better.”

  anthony fauci, covid-19, gain of function, rand paul, senate, wuhan institute of virology, wuhan lab leak


Virginia school board unanimously rejects extreme transgender guidelines

'We need to say yes to protecting our kids, no to being forced into adopting sexualized political agendas.'
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 3:55 pm EST
Featured Image
Raymond Wolfe Follow

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A Virginia school board rebuked the state’s radical new transgender policies in a unanimous vote last week, following complaints from outraged parents and other members of the community.  

The Russell County school board voted 7-0 on Thursday to reject guidelines on gender-confused students pushed by the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE), the Epoch Times reported. The board also voted against incorporating critical race theory into lessons.  

Earlier this year, the VDOE introduced model policies mandating that public schools “accept a student’s assertion of their gender identity without requiring any particular substantiating evidence, including diagnosis, treatment, or legal documents.”  

The policies additionally allow students to use lockers rooms and bathrooms based on “gender identity” and threaten that teachers could be fired for non-compliance. According to the education department, schools must “adopt policies that are consistent with but may be more comprehensive than the model policies,” which are expected to be implemented this fall. 

“I was elected by the people of this community, and I intend to stand up to protect every kid and do the will of the people of Russell County — and not that of an overreaching state government,” Russell County school board member Bob Gibson said Thursday. “The most important thing we can do is protect every kid and to provide them with a safe and secure place to learn.” 

Several local parents denounced the VDOE guidelines at a livestreamed meeting ahead of the school board vote last week. “This could directly threaten our kids’ physical safety, privacy rights,” a man who identified himself as a father of a public-school student said, adding that “the policy forces the schools to allow boys identifying as girls, for instance, [to] use the girls’ restroom, female locker rooms, and this can be done without notifying the parents.” 

“We need to say yes to protecting our kids, no to being forced into adopting sexualized political agendas.”  

The VDOE has claimed that the Russell County school board’s rejection of the department’s extreme transgender rules violates state law.  

“The 2020 legislation (House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161) requires local school boards to ‘adopt policies that are consistent with but may be more comprehensive than the model policies developed by the Virginia Department of Education’ by the start of the 2021-2022 school year,” a VDOE spokesperson told the Washington Examiner. “It is the responsibility of the local school board to follow the law.” 

However, a Virginia-based Christian legal group suing to block the VDOE policies has argued that schools “simply cannot adopt” the “legally problematic” guidance.  

“[T]he policies themselves violated various state and federal laws, including infringing upon numerous fundamental rights of students, parents, and teachers,” Josh Hetzler, legal counsel with the Founding Freedoms Law Center, said in a Friday press conference in Russell County.  

“Because of how legally problematic the VDOE’s model policies are, not to mention the likelihood of tangible harms they will allow to students’ bodily privacy, safety, and dignity in private spaces, and to parental rights, school boards simply cannot adopt policies consistent with the existing model policies.” 

Hetzler noted that a hearing for a preliminary injunction to suspend the guidelines is scheduled for Wednesday in Lynchburg Circuit Court. 

Virginia parents across the state have stepped up the fight against transgenderism in public schools this year, including in Loudoun County, where two parents were recently arrested after protesting transgender policies and critical race theory.  

“We are the majority, and they are cancelling us, they are censoring us, they are moving forward with their own political agenda irrespective of the constituents they represent – and because of that, they will be recalled,” Loudoun County parent Brenda Tillett, president of Stand Up Virginia, told LifeSiteNews in June. 

  bob gibson, education, indoctrination, public schools, russell county school board, transgenderism, virginia, virginia department of education


Norwegian church holds ‘name change ceremony’ to celebrate transgender person

49-year-old Elin Stillingen's claims to be a woman were celebrated and supported by a local church.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 3:35 pm EST
Featured Image
Transgender symbol Shutterstock
Clare Marie Merkowsky

OSLO, Norway, July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) - A Lutheran church in Norway recently hosted a celebration for a gender-confused man, which is reportedly the first such event in a place of worship in the country.  

Elin Stillingen is a 49-year-old man who believes that he is a woman, and legally had his name and gender changed. According to the Associated Press, on July 17, the medieval Hoff Church in Oslo, Norway held a name changing ceremony for him, affirming his delusion. 

Before the ceremony, Stillingen told Norwegian broadcaster TV2, “I’m a member of the Norwegian church, and I’m also about to come ‘out of the closet’ as a Christian, so this ceremony is important to me.” 

In Genesis 5:2, the Douay Rheims version of the Bible clearly states, “He created them male and female; and blessed them.” Even the Lutheran version of the Bible states the same thing with slightly different wording, reading, “He made him in the image of God, and created them male and female, and blessed them.”  

Despite this, the celebration was organized by Lutheran pastor Stein Ovesen along with the Stensveen Foundation, a Norwegian LBGT activist organization.  

“I know that so many are grateful that this event has come true, because this goes deep into the lives of people,” Ovesen said, also admitting that some people opposed the event.   

“On the conservative wing, you will find priests who are deeply concerned about what we do today. But for me this is an important act that expresses the grace and openness that God shows me,” he continued.  

After the ceremony, Stillingen stated, “It feels very right,” and, “I'm very, very happy.”

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

  elin stillingen, hoff church, lgbt, lutheranism, norway, oslo, stein ovesen, stensveen foundation, transgenderism


Traditional orders react to Traditionis Custodes: Bishops are now the ‘jailers’ of the Latin Mass

“Many people have discovered or returned to the Faith thanks to this liturgy. How can we fail to notice, moreover, that the communities of the faithful attached to it are often young and flourishing, and that many Christian households, priests or religious vocations have come from it?’ asked the FSSP.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 3:19 pm EST
Featured Image
screenshot /
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow Michael
By Michael Haynes

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – As the long-term fallout from Pope Francis’s motu proprio restricting the traditional liturgy of the Church, Traditionis Custodes, remains to be fully understood, priestly societies have registered their varying reactions to the document, as the future of such traditional groups remains in the “anti-traditional” hands of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.

Traditionis Custodes was promulgated and came into effect July 16, 2021, ushering in a new era in the Catholic Church for the clergy and members of the faithful devoted to the traditional liturgy (also called the Latin Mass, Traditional Latin Mass, Extraordinary Form, Old Rite, or Mass of the Ages). It stipulates that priests are to “request” permission from their diocesan bishops to say the traditional Mass, and consequently bishops can essentially forbid priests from saying the Latin Mass. The bishops are also to decide “whether or not to retain” parishes which had been canonically erected for the offering of the traditional liturgies.

The document also says the Latin Mass is not to be offered in parish churches, but rather at other “locations.”

Such stipulations do away with the permissions of Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 Summorum pontificum, which afforded priests the right to celebrate Mass in the traditional rites, without needing the express authorization of the bishop or the Holy See.

As for the traditional orders offering the Mass and sacraments according to the 1962 Missal under the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, such as the Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), the Institute of Christ the King Soverign Priest (ICKSP), and the Institute of the Good Shepherd (IBP), Pope Francis has now moved them to the care of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (CDW), and the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life.

The CDW is led by the recently appointed Archbishop Arthur Roche, who is known as a firm opponent of the Latin Mass. Meanwhile the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life has been recently described by theologian and liturgy expert Dr. Peter Kwasniewski as “notoriously anti-traditional,” and is led by Cardinal João Bráz de Aviz.

— 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 light of the motu proprio, and with the potential impact as yet not fully clear, the FSSP, as well as the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), have responded to the document with separate statements, although the SSPX’s is not an official statement from the group’s superior general. The SSPX merely published an article offering “initial thoughts” on the motu proprio via its official news service, 

The other two major traditional groups, the ICKSP and the Institute of the Good Shepherd, have not issued official responses to the motu proprio as yet.

Fraternity of St. Peter does not recognize itself ‘in the criticisms made’

On the day of the motu proprio’s promulgation, the FSSP released a brief missive, describing the document as a “Cross” and a “means of our sanctification.” The group, founded as a clerical Society of Apostolic Life of Pontifical Right in 1988, added that it remained “committed to serving the faithful attending our apostolates in accordance with our Constitutions and charism as we have done since our founding.”

However, on July 20, an updated message was released from the FSSP’s headquarters in Fribourg, Switzerland, expressing how the Fraternity received Traditionis Custodes with “surprise.”

The FSSP noted it has “always professed its adherence to the entire Magisterium of the Church and its fidelity to the Roman Pontiff and the successors of the Apostles, exercising its ministry under the responsibility of the diocesan bishops.” Such a line could be viewed as a response to the Pope’s accompanying letter to the motu proprio, in which he decried “the instrumental use of Missale Romanum of 1962” which he said “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’.”

The FSSP said it was “deeply saddened” to hear of the underlying reasons behind the Pope’s restrictions on the traditional Mass, and that the FSSP “in no way recognizes itself in the criticisms made.”

Furthermore, the FSSP mentioned the surprising nature of the absence from the motu proprio of the “the many fruits visible in the apostolates” celebrating the traditional liturgy, and the “joy of the faithful in being able to benefit from this liturgical form.”

“Many people have discovered or returned to the Faith thanks to this liturgy,” stated the Fraternity. “How can we fail to notice, moreover, that the communities of the faithful attached to it are often young and flourishing, and that many Christian households, priests or religious vocations have come from it?”

The Fraternity wrote that it was faced with a two-fold aspect, whereby it wished to reaffirm its “unwavering fidelity to the successor of Peter on the one hand,” while also remaining “faithful to our Constitutions and charism, continuing to serve the faithful as we have done since our foundation.”

The statement expressed the hope for a continued collaboration with and understanding from the bishops of the Catholic Church.

SSPX: TLM has gone from an animal sanctuary to the zoo, where it’s targeted for extinction

The Society has yet to issue its own official statement in response to the motu proprio, but has published an article giving its “initial thoughts” on the document. Pope Francis’ document “illustrates the precariousness of the current magisterium,” wrote the SSPX.

Nor was the Society sparing in its summary of Traditionis Custodes: “Everything, or just about everything in Summorum pontificum, is scattered, abandoned, or destroyed.”

The article contrasted the Pope’s defense of ecological issues, such as “an endangered animal or plant species,” while he also “promulgates the extinction of those who are attached to the immemorial rite of the Holy Mass.”

“While Francis defends an endangered animal or plant species, he decides and promulgates the extinction of those who are attached to the immemorial rite of the Holy Mass,” the SSPX wrote.

Paraphrasing the Pope’s attitude to the Latin Mass, the SSPX wrote: “This species no longer has the right to live: it must disappear. And all means will be used to achieve this result.”

The Society’s tone is far more free than that of the Fraternity, describing how the traditional liturgy has been relegated from a “reservation” or sanctuary-style system under Summorum Pontificum to a “zoo regime,” where such ancient liturgical celebrations are in “cages, narrowly circumscribed and demarcated.” The zoo keepers of these Masses, or “jailers,” are “none other than the bishops themselves.”

Each aspect of the motu proprio is broken down and analyzed in detail, availing of zoological terminology.

Describing Article 3, §6 of the motu proprio, which prohibits diocesan bishops from allowing new traditional groups to spring up, the SSPX writes: “This measure is akin to sterilization: it is forbidden to reproduce and perpetuate these savages of the past who must disappear.”

As for the permission now required for priests to say the Latin Mass, the SSPX states “if it is a question of restraining, reducing, or even destroying groups, the bishops have carte blanche, but if it there is a need to grant authorization, the pope does not trust them: it is necessary to go through Rome.”

Vatican II is compared to a vaccine used to inoculate the faithful against the Latin Mass, which the SSPX paraphrased as being a “virus”: “Carried away by his enthusiasm, the pope almost comes to the point of saying that it is the Old Mass which is a dangerous virus that must be defended against.”

Pope Francis’s accompanying letter has been described by some online as being “worse than [Traditionis Custodes] itself.” Referring to this letter and the motu proprio, the SSPX summarizes that the two documents give “impression of sectarianism coupled with an overt abuse of power.”

The article echoed the words of Dr. Kwasniewski, describing the motu proprio as being without “legitimacy,” and “not a law of the Church,” since “a law against the common good is no valid law.”

Such “angry proponents” of the “liturgical reform” are marked by “resentment” against the traditional liturgy, wrote the SSPX, and hence such people “cannot take” the “success” of the traditional liturgy.

“The fact remains that this motu proprio, which will sooner or later end in the oblivion of the history of the Church, is not good news in itself,” closes the Society’s article. “It marks an abrupt end in the reappropriation of its Tradition by the Church, and it will delay the end of the crisis which has already been going on for more than sixty years.”

  fssp, priestly fraternity of st. peter, society of st. pius x, sspx, traditionis custodes


American Academy of Pediatrics: Schoolchildren aged 2 and over ought to be forced to wear masks

The pediatric group said ‘all students older than 2 years and all school staff should wear face masks at school,’ and suggested that ‘all eligible individuals’ should take one of the experimental COVID-19 drugs.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 2:08 pm EST
Featured Image
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow

ITASCA, Illinois, July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The American Academy of Pediatrics is claiming that all children age two and over should participate in “universal masking” in schools this fall, despite evidence that children do not significantly spread COVID-19 and research which suggests face masks may pose a risk to children’s health.

Based in Itasca, Illinois, with an office in Washington, D.C., The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), an organization composed of 67,000 primary care pediatricians, pediatric medical subspecialists, and pediatric surgical specialists, said it “recommends universal masking in school” as children prepare to return to in-person learning this fall.

The academy, which publicly supports “surgical intervention” and puberty-blocking drugs for gender-confused children, also claims that all school staff should wear masks regardless of vaccination status, and alleges that proof of COVID-19 vaccination may become a necessary prerequisite for in-person learning.

A news release put out by the group July 19 said “all students older than 2 years and all school staff should wear face masks at school (unless medical or developmental conditions prohibit use).”

The AAP added that all “eligible individuals,” i.e. adult staff and children over the age of 12, “should receive the COVID-19 vaccine,” and said it “may become necessary for schools to collect COVID-19 vaccine information of staff and students and for schools to require COVID-19 vaccination for in-person learning.”

Masking, vaccinating kids with experimental shots pose significant risks 

The academy receives substantial funding from pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, which makes an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in collaboration with the German biotechnology company BioNTech.

The Big Pharma corporation funds the AAP’s flagship initiative called The Community Access to Child Health (CATCH) which along with their District Residence Liaisons serves as the AAP’s “boots on the ground.”

The pediatric group provided a list of reasons for recommending universal masking for students and staff, including that “a significant portion of the student population is not eligible for vaccination.”

To date, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not allow the vaccine for children under 12, but recommends it for children age 12 and older. (American children on the CDC vaccine schedule get far more vaccines than their parents did, including one at birth for a disease, hepatitis B, that is spread through sex with infected strangers or dirty drug needles.)

However, a recent report by the BBC suggested that COVID-19 vaccines might not be offered to children aged 12-17 in the U.K. due to acknowledged ethical issues and analysis of the risks posed to children.

Even Public Health England's medical adviser Dr. Susan Hopkins has warned against forcing primary schoolchildren to wear masks, and the U.K. government has promoted her comments.

And Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, a New York coronavirus doctor who pioneered effective safe treatments for the Wuhan virus told LifeSiteNews in a recent interview that mask-wearing is creating a generation of autistic kids.

The CDC recently acknowledged a higher-than-expected number of cases of heart inflammation among young people who had received a full round of mRNA injections. The CDC identified 226 reports of heart inflammation discovered in patients shortly after taking the second dose of an mRNA drug, which might constitute myocarditis and pericarditis according to the agency’s “working case definition.”

In addition to heart inflammation, COVID-19 vaccines have been linked to other serious reactions particularly in the young.

At a June 2021 news conference hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), a mother of a 12-year-old girl who became wheel-chair bound after volunteering for the Pfizer jab in a vaccine trial said, “Before Maddie got her final dose of the vaccine, she was healthy, got straight As, had lots of friends, and had a life.”

Subsequently the pre-teen has been hospitalized three times for two months and has been to the emergency room nine times, suffering from severe abdominal and chest pain.

Maddie suffered from gastroparesis, nausea and vomiting, erratic blood pressure, memory loss, brain fog, headaches, dizziness, fainting, seizures, verbal and motor tics, menstrual cycle issues, lost feeling from the waist down, lost bowel and bladder control, and she had a nasogastric tube placed because she lost the ability to eat.

As the BBC noted, “Children's risk of severe disease from Covid is tiny, deaths are extremely rare and have only occurred in UK children with profound underlying and life-limiting conditions. The direct benefits to them of vaccination would be low.”

The American Association of Pediatrics’ guidance claimed that since most children are currently ineligible to receive COVID-19 vaccines, masks provide “protection of unvaccinated students from COVID-19 and… reduce transmission.”

The academy also cited a “lack of a system” for schools to “monitor vaccine status among students, teachers and staff.” Most schools are already required to retain students’ medical records pertaining to certain vaccines.

Also listed as reasons for advocating universal masking were the challenges posed by “monitoring or enforcing mask policies for those who are not vaccinated,” as well as potentially low vaccination rates in the community and “continued concern for variants that are more easily spread among children, adolescents, and adults.” 

‘The question whether nose and mouth covering increases carbon dioxide in inhaled air is crucial’

The report by the left-wing pediatric association came days after National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director Dr. Anthony Fauci gave an interview on MSNBC claiming that “unvaccinated children of a certain age, greater than two years old, should be wearing masks, no doubt about that.”

Fauci was criticized for his comments, which experts have noted do not align with research which suggests that children are not particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, nor do they spread the disease in significant numbers.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, an epidemiologist, an associate professor of medicine at Stanford University Medical School, and a co-author of  The Great Barrington Declaration, told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham July 13 that “Dr. Fauci spent last summer campaigning, in effect, to close our schools down.”

The Stanford professor said Fauci “scared parents with talk about how dangerous COVID was to kids and how they were spreading the disease,” adding that “we know now that that’s not true, in fact kids are very inefficient spreaders of the disease.”

In addition to studies which indicate that children are at extremely low risk of contracting, spreading, or even getting very sick from COVID-19, research has suggested that face masks themselves pose a risk to children, causing them to inhale dangerous levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) which becomes trapped behind the material.

According to a randomized clinical trial conducted in Germany by Dr. Harald Walach and colleagues, although “[m]any governments have made nose and mouth covering or face masks compulsory” for children, the “evidence base for this is weak.”

“The question whether nose and mouth covering increases carbon dioxide in inhaled air is crucial,” the study’s authors continued. “A large-scale survey in Germany of adverse effects in parents and children using data of 25 930 children has shown that 68% of the participating children had problems when wearing nose and mouth coverings.”

The study’s peer-reviewed research letter said that children inhaling the trapped air were breathing in more than six times the safe limit of carbon dioxide as put forth by the German Federal Environmental Office.

While the safe limit is 0.2 percent, the air the masked children breathed in was found to contain over 1.3 percent carbon dioxide.

The study suggested younger children were at even greater risk, with one seven-year-old child in the study inhaling air with 2.5 percent carbon dioxide, more than 12 times the safe limit.

According to the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS) excess inhalation of carbon dioxide can cause symptoms including “rapid breathing, rapid heart rate, clumsiness, emotional upsets and fatigue.”

When oxygen is seriously displaced by C02, extreme symptoms may include “nausea and vomiting, collapse, convulsions, coma and death.”

CCOHS reported that “Lack of oxygen can cause permanent damage to organs including the brain and heart.”

Asked to comment on the AAP’s recommendations, Dr. Fauci told CNN that the advice was in line with advice put out by health experts.

“[When] you have a degree of viral dynamics in the community, and you have a substantial proportion of the population that is unvaccinated,” Fauci alleged, “you really want to go the extra step, the extra mile, to make sure that there’s not a lot of transmission, even breakthrough infections among vaccinated individuals.”

Fauci said that in putting out its guidance the AAP “just want[s] to be extra safe.”

The AAP’s recommendations calling for universal masking and the vaccination of all “eligible individuals” comes as some U.S. cities and states have begun advancing measures which would permit the vaccination of minors without parental knowledge or consent.

The Washington, D.C. City Council recently approved an act authorizing kids 11 years old and up to receive vaccines without parental knowledge or consent.

In Massachusetts, legislators are considering a series of laws pertaining to immunization, including one which would allow minors of any age to receive preventative treatment for any infectious disease a child is deemed “at risk of contracting,” without first obtaining the consent of parents.

LifeSiteNews reached out to the AAP but was told the association’s physicians were unavailable for comment.

  american academy of pediatrics, coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccine for children, coronavirus vaccines, lockdowns, mask mandate, masks


Federal judge upholds Indiana University’s vaccine mandate, claims it isn’t coercive

Students at Indiana University who do not take a vaccine by the appointed deadline have their class registrations canceled. Those who qualify for an exemption are required to undergo twice-a-week testing, forced quarantine if exposed to a person who has tested positive for COVID-19, and mandatory mask-wearing on university property.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 11:57 am EST
Featured Image
Photo taken from a recent protest against Indiana University’s vaccine mandate WHAS11 / YouTube
Ashley Sadler Ashley Sadler Follow

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

SOUTH BEND, Indiana, July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A federal judge on Monday upheld Indiana University’s vaccine mandate which requires students, faculty, and staff to take an experimental COVID-19 jab as a condition of attending classes or maintaining employment at the institution. 

The Trump-appointed judge said the mandate is in the “legitimate interest of public health.”

James Bopp Jr., Director of Litigation for America’s Frontline Doctors and lead counsel in the Indiana students’ lawsuit, said in a July 19 press release following the ruling that the vaccine mandate is “unconstitutional,” adding that “[c]ontinuing our necessary to guarantee that IU students receive the fair due process they’re owed by a public university.”

“An admitted IU student’s right to attend IU cannot be conditioned on the student waiving their rights to bodily integrity, bodily autonomy, and consent to medical treatment like IU has done here,” Bopp said. 

Bopp said that the compulsory vaccination policy of the university “did not properly balance the risks (both known and unknown) of the COVID vaccine to college-age students against the risks of COVID itself to that population.”

Indiana University’s COVID-19 mandate, put in place in May, requires “students, faculty and staff at all IU campuses” to “be fully vaccinated or have an approved exemption by August 15 or when they return to campus after August 1, whichever is earlier.”

Following the announcement of the mandate, eight students filed a lawsuit against the university’s board of trustees in June, saying the institution’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate violates the constitutional rights of students under the 14th Amendment. 

The 14th Amendment stipulates that no state shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

As reported by USA Today, the students argued the mandate violates the right of students to refuse medical treatment, and said that the policy also breaches an Indiana law forbidding COVID-19 vaccine passports. 

However Ross Silverman, a health policy professor with Indiana University’s Fairbanks School of Public Health, said in May that the university is not subject to the ban on vaccine passports which applies to “state and local government units” since “Indiana University is defined as a state educational institution.”

“It’s not considered a state agency, it’s not considered local government,” Silverman said.

The students who sued Indiana University asked U.S. District Court Judge Damon Leichty to grant a preliminary injunction to prevent the institution from forcing students to take the experimental shots before the fall semester. 

But Leichty, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump in July 2018, denied the request, saying students failed to show that the vaccine mandate would cause the plaintiffs irreparable harm.

Judge claims forcing staff and students to comply or leave, is a ‘hard choice’, but ‘doesn't amount to coercion’

In a 101-page opinion, the judge said that the “Fourteenth Amendment permits Indiana University to pursue a reasonable and due process of vaccination in the legitimate interest of public health for its students, faculty and staff.”

“Today, on this preliminary record, the university has done so for its campus communities,” Leichty wrote, adding that “[t]he students haven’t established a likelihood of success on the merits of their Fourteenth Amendment claim or the many requirements that must precede the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction.”

Leichty also claimed that the mandate — which requires students, faculty, and staff to either take the experimental shot or apply for an exemption under very narrow criteria, or else lose their jobs or be removed from their classes — was not coercive.

"The university is presenting the students with a difficult choice — get the vaccine or else apply for an exemption or deferral, transfer to a different school, or forego schools for the semester altogether," Leichty said. "But, this hard choice doesn't amount to coercion."

— 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

Univeristy promises ‘strong consequences’ for those who don’t comply. Exempt students required to undergo regular testing, mandatory masking

Under Indiana University’s policy, students are allowed to request exemptions from the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for religious, ethical, or medical reasons, but the university says that exemptions will be “extremely limited” and students with exemptions will be subject to “extra requirements.”

It is unclear what proof the university requires for students to obtain exemptions for religious or ethical reasons.

A narrow category of immunocompromised individuals may request the medical exemption if they have had a hematopoietic or solid organ transplant or been treated with the prescription drug Rituximab. Pregnant or breastfeeding mothers planning to attend Indiana University in the fall may also request a medical exemption, as well as those who have “received COVID-specific monoclonal antibodies in the past 90 days.” 

Students enrolled in a program designed to be held exclusively online will not be required to get the jab, however students may not opt to take online versions of standard university classes to skirt the mandate. 

The university says it will provide “strong consequences for those who choose not to meet the COVID-19 vaccine requirement and do not receive an exemption.” 

Students who are not “fully vaccinated” and who have not obtained an exemption by the deadline will have their class registrations canceled, student ID card and online portal access terminated, and will be prohibited from participating in campus activities.

The university said faculty and staff who refuse the shot “will no longer be able to be employed by Indiana University,” adding that choosing to refrain from taking the injection and working remotely “is not an option.”

According to court filings, six of the eight students who sued the school were granted exemptions from the vaccine requirement, but are subject to “extra requirements” including twice-a-week testing, forced quarantine if exposed to a person who has tested positive for COVID-19, and mandatory mask-wearing on university property. 

Jaime Carini, one of the plaintiffs in the suit, reported “a sincerely held religious objection to receiving the COVID vaccine,” and accordingly “sought and was granted a religious exemption.”

According to the document, Carini suffers from several chronic illnesses and was told by her doctor she should not receive the COVID-19 shot.

Carini is seeking a medical exemption in addition to the religious exemption, arguing that her serious medical conditions were not included in Indiana University’s narrow medical exemption criteria. 

Further, Carini has stated that since she is taking Ivermectin she is protected against COVID-19, according to advice from her physician. She has argued she should not be subject to bi-weekly testing since she is not at risk from the coronavirus. 

According to the filing, Indiana University denied the request.

Another student who was granted a religious exemption attempted to gain an exemption to the extra requirements, also on religious grounds. According to the suit, the university’s COVID Response Team denied the request, stating that religious exemptions apply only to vaccination and that “anyone who is granted an exemption on this basis is required to wear a mask at all times on IU property and is subject to routine mitigation testing.”

The university added that “[t]here are no exemptions from these masking and mitigation testing requirements,” and warned that “[f]ailure to comply with masking and mitigation testing requirements will result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal or termination from the university.”

Vaccine safety concerns weighed against ‘almost zero’ risk from COVID to college-aged students

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.

Last week  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it has added a label to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine that warns of a risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder that can cause paralysis. The FDA’s GBS warning followed similar announcement by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine. 

The FDA and CDC had notably halted use of the Johnson & Johnson shot in April due to a link to blood clot disorders. In June, the FDA also added a label warning of heart inflammation to fact sheets for the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, after the CDC revealed that more than 1,200 cases of post-vaccination heart inflammation have been reported to U.S. authorities. 

College-aged young adults are statistically at very low risk from COVID-19, leading some experts to argue that the risks posed by vaccination outweigh the possible benefits of administering experimental treatments to combat a virus which does not present a serious threat to them.

As reported previously by LifeSiteNews, Dr. Robert Malone, who invented the mRNA technology which is used in the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech jabs, told Fox News host Tucker Carlson that for the young, “the benefits probably don’t outweigh the risks.”

Malone lamented that “unfortunately, the risk-benefit analysis is not being done,” and said in his view that “the risk-benefit ratio for those 18 and below doesn’t justify vaccines, and there’s a pretty good chance that it doesn’t justify vaccination in these very young adults.”

Meanwhile Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, director of the Medical Ethics Program at the University of California, Irvine, said the risks posed by COVID-19 to college aged students “are very, very small — almost zero, statistically speaking. So any risk from vaccination is likely going to outweigh risks from COVID in this population.”

Ruling does not end students’ fight

Details regarding the other plaintiffs in the suit are included in the document filed with the U.S. District Court.

It is unclear whether students who are dismissed from the school for failing to comply with the vaccine mandate or “extra requirements” will have recourse to pursue a refund of their tuition.

Despite the majority of students being granted exemptions to the vaccine mandate, the students plan to appeal the judge’s decision upholding the policy.

In his press release James Bopp Jr., lead counsel in the Indiana students’ lawsuit said that the ruling “does not end the students’ fight — we plan to immediately appeal the judge’s decision.”

“In addition, we plan on asking the judge to put a hold on IU’s Mandate pending that appeal. We are confident the court of appeals will agree that the Mandate should be put on hold.”

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


Mother weeps as she tells senator how Pfizer shot left her daughter wheelchair-bound

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

Will COVID vaccines really bring us back to normal

  covid tyranny, indiana university, vaccine mandates


Top USCCB priest resigns after bombshell revelations he was active on gay hookup app

The alleged covert homosexual activity by Burrill is especially troubling because of his role at the USCCB directing diocesan and conference responses to clerical sexual scandals.  
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 10:39 am EST
Featured Image
Msgr. Jeffrey Burrill / screenshot
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug
By Doug Mainwaring

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The general secretary of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Monsignor Jeffrey Burrill, resigned yesterday just hours before a media report was published alleging that he had “engaged in serial sexual misconduct.”   

The bombshell investigation by The Pillar was based on a presumed massive trove of commercially available data from the gay hook-up app Grindr, which an analyst was then able to link to a mobile device used by Burrill, showing that he “visited gay bars and private residences while using a location-based hookup app in numerous cities from 2018 to 2020, even while traveling on assignment for the U.S. bishops’ conference.”   

The alleged covert homosexual activity by Burrill is especially troubling because of his role at the USCCB directing diocesan and conference responses to clerical sexual scandals.  


The Pillar’s sexual misconduct report on this one priest may well be just the tip of the iceberg based on the presumed wide scope of the data now in the possession of the online publication. So far there is no indication from The Pillar concerning plans for future revelations based on additional incriminating evidence in the data set. 

“Just imagine how many priests that have used the grinder app are freaking out right about now,” Lepanto Institute founder and president Michael Hichborn said in a Facebook post.  

“The revelation regarding Msgr. Burrill is a drop in the bucket on the information contained in that dataset,” he added.


“Well, friends, this is not just one more corrupt priest,” said Catholic scholar Dr. Janet E. Smith, retired professor of moral theology and a renowned worldwide as an expert on Humanae Vitae.

“I fear his proclivities and activities were well known by those who hired him,” Smith wrote on Facebook. “And it is highly likely that many bishops are using the same apps. So this is huge. There are going to be many sleepless bishops.”


“Let it sink in that Burrill from 2009 until 2013 was a professor and formation director at the Pontifical North American College in Rome,” Smith wrote in a commentary for Crisis Magazine. “In a lawsuit by a former seminarian, accusations are being made that sexual predation has been common for a very long time at the NAC. I think a new line of investigation has just opened up.”

“Bishops should want to know what immoral activity their priests are engaged in is that the whole diocese is liable for their behavior—for the abuse both of minors and the vulnerable,” asserted Smith. 

“Shouldn’t the bishops welcome this data? Msgr. Burill has a bishop who is his spiritual father. Msgr. Burill’s soul is in mortal danger. His father should want to know what he is doing and help him stop and recommit himself to a chaste life,” she concluded. “For let’s not forget, this is all about souls.”

According to an archived version of Burrill’s now-deleted profile on the USCCB website, “Msgr. Burrill is a priest of the Diocese of La Crosse, Wisconsin, where he served as pastor of St. Bronislava Church from 2013-2016.” The bishop of the Diocese of La Crosse recently suspended the faculties of outspoken priest Father James Altman, famous for his viral video “You Can’t be Catholic and a Democrat.”

Phone data: A new frontier for investigations 

While Catholics such as Smith think this is a huge story for the Church, the ground-breaking data-based investigation has also caught the attention of the secular and tech worlds.  

“This is a MASSIVE story,” tweeted Garritt De Vynck, a tech reporter for the Washington Post.    

“Some privacy experts said that they couldn’t recall other instances of phone data being de-anonymized and reported publicly,” noted a report by the Washington Post. “It’s not illegal and will likely happen more as people come to understand what data is available about others.”

Shortly before The Pillar published its report on Burrill, Catholic News Agency (CNA) issued a preemptive article based on anonymous sources. 

“The prospect of private parties using national security-style surveillance technology to track the movements and activities of bishops, priests, and other Church personnel is raising concerns about civil liberties, privacy rights and what means are ethical to use in Church reform efforts,” wrote CNA.  

CNA claimed to have been offered in 2018 access to the data set used by The Pillar’s report on Burrill, but turned it down. J.D. Flynn and Ed Condon, founders and editors of The Pillar, previously worked for CNA. Flynn and Condon are canon lawyers.

Leftist Catholics, organizations freaked out by the Burrill revelations

Apparently appalled that the revelations about Burrill’s serial homosexuality were made public, far-left and pro-LGBT Catholics condemned The Pillar, attempting to ward off future reports by suggesting that both the investigation and publication of the Burrill report were unethical.  

“This is a disgrace: spying on bishops and priests to see if they're being chaste and celibate,” tweeted Father James Martin, SJ, perhaps the most outspoken force for the normalization of homosexuality and transgenderism within the Roman Catholic Church. The Church teaches that bishops and priests (with the exception of those married before ordination, such as Eastern Rite priests or those in the Anglican Ordinariate) are to be celibate.

“Of course it's aimed at gay priests, and ‘gay apps,’ which shouldn't surprise anyone,” continued Martin. “It's part of the ongoing witch hunt against gay priests.”

In a separate Twitter thread, Martin suggested a priest with a high-powered job for the USCCB might be considered a “vulnerable” person: “These witch hunts, usually aimed at vulnerable people working for the church, or targeting people that the authors don't agree with or simply don't like, must end.’

“They are not coming from God and they are in no way ‘Catholic,’’ he asserted. 

“The Pillar investigation of Monsignor Burrill is unethical, homophobic innuendo,” blared a Religion News (RNS) headline. “The hook on which this story hangs is a long-discredited link between sexual abuse and homosexuality.”

The majority of sexually abusive priests prey on teenage boys.

— 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

Writing for RNS, Steven P. Millies said The Pillar report “heralds a new and even uglier era in American Catholicism.”

“Ultimately today's big story won't be the priest Pillar Catholic outed, but questions about the ethics of data mining and buying mined data to reveal personal information,” tweeted Mike Lewis, editor of Where Peter Is, a liberal blog.

“There's a moral angle and a privacy angle,” continued Lewis. “There are risks and dangers here that we probably can't foresee.”

Other Twitter users, however, pointed out that left-wing Catholics were more upset at Burrill being exposed than at what Burrill did.

Funding questions

Questions also remain about the source of funding for The Pillar’s data acquisition and analysis.  

“Such investigations don't come cheap,” said left-wing Catholic writer Dawn Eden Goldstein, who recently sued the president of the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM) for “online harassment” (the case was thrown out).

“Do the site's funders have an enemies list? Do the editors choose to reveal dirt on some folks & not others? Why should we trust their good intentions without knowing their donors?”

“One of the reasons I've been concerned about @NapaInstitute is that a number of its associates have been quietly acquiring data sets that could be combined with cellphone data of the type that The Pillar used to accuse a priest,” said Goldstein in one of two long Twitter threads. 

It remains to be seen what The Pillar will do with the remaining data at its disposal – and which other prominent priests the data may implicate.

  fr. james martin, grindr, homosexuality, james martin, monsignor jeffrey burrill, united states conference of catholic bishops, usccb


Pro-abortion Kamala Harris invokes Jesus Christ, claims taking experimental COVID-19 jab is embodiment of ‘loving your neighbor’

Given Kamala Harris' radical opposition to Christian teaching on the sanctity of life and marriage, many are questioning her appeal to Scripture during her attempt to push as many Americans as possible to receive experimental COVID-19 shots.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 8:36 am EST
Featured Image
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow

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

DETROIT, Michigan, July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Kamala Harris last week invoked Jesus Christ’s commandment to “love thy neighbor” in an attempt to push as many Americans as possible to receive experimental COVID-19 shots.

“I do believe that the act of getting vaccinated is the very essence of what the Bible tells us when it says ‘Love thy neighbor,’” Harris said during remarks at a vaccine mobilization event in Detroit, Michigan.

“But what we know it means when we talk about love thy neighbor, is that yes, it may be the person next door, and it may be the man on the side of the road, and it may be a perfect stranger,” Harris continued. “And in the face of that stranger, you see a friend. That’s what this is about. And so by getting vaccinated, you are loving your neighbor.”

Harris repeated the “love thy neighbor” refrain during other vaccine promotion stops, and during remarks she made at the White House, which she posted to her Twitter page with the message, “Getting vaccinated embodies the spirit of ‘Love thy neighbor.’”

During her speech Harris failed to mention the growing number of safety concerns related to the experimental jabs, despite several of those concerns being officially recognized by various U.S. Government bodies.

Data released earlier this month from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) VAERS system released reported 411,931 total adverse events in the United States following injections of experimental COVID-19 gene therapy vaccines, including 6,985 deaths and 34,065 serious injuries, between Dec. 14, 2020, and June 25, 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. 

Last week  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it has added a label to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine that warns of a risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), a rare neurological disorder that can cause paralysis. The FDA’s GBS warning followed similar announcement by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine. 

The FDA and CDC had notably halted use of the Johnson & Johnson shot in April due to a link to blood clot disorders. In June, the FDA also added a label warning of heart inflammation to fact sheets for the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, after the CDC revealed that more than 1,200 cases of post-vaccination heart inflammation have been reported to U.S. authorities. 

In another part of her speech Harris described the use of a church as a vaccination site as an example of its community role as a “place of healing.”

Her use of Scripture to appeal to Americans’ sense of morality and charity was immediately slammed as disingenuous by commenters.

“Love thy neighbor? Doesn't she support abortion on demand?....Is that love?...” commented one Twitter user, along with a moving ultrasound image of an unborn child.

Harris has made the vague claim that she is a person “of faith” and regularly attends church, but her history as a public figure involves a consistent streak of anti-Christian policy decisions.

Harris has long been a strong advocate for abortion, anti-Christian legislation opposing freedom of conscience, as well as homosexual “marriage.” Harris went so far as to officiate same-sex “marriages” in San Francisco in 2004, and made undermining traditional marriage a “central issue” in her campaign to become attorney general of California.

— 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

Harris, who has held consistent 100 percent pro-abortion ratings with Planned Parenthood Action Fund and NARAL in recent years, jointly stated with Joe Biden that their administration is “committed to codifying Roe v. Wade,” and has bragged about forcing religiously-owned companies and pro-life pregnancy centers to violate their consciences.

As California attorney general, she also oversaw the investigation of the pro-life Center for Medical Progress (CMP) when it released undercover videos in 2015 revealing Planned Parenthood’s illegal practice of selling the organs of aborted babies. She was accepting the abortion giant’s donations for her Senate run at the time.

Left-wing news outlets have complained that Donald Trump’s characterization of Harris as “nasty” is due to sexism (Despite the Washington Post’s admission that Trump has used the insult against both men and women in roughly equal measure), but Harris is on record making comments that many believe deserve that description.

Harris was criticized for a “vicious” joke she made in 2018, when Ellen DeGeneres asked Harris, "If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence or Jeff Sessions who would it be?"

"Does one of us have to come out alive?" quipped Harris.

Kamala Harris and Joe Biden have been ramping up efforts to have as many Americans as possible “vaccinated” against COVID-19. They recently announced a door-to-door vaccination initiative despite the fact that all COVID-19 vaccines on the market still only have an emergency-use authorization, and have been widely reported as causing numerous deaths and other serious side effects.

Dr. Joseph Mercola recently noted that ​“reports of deaths and serious injuries from the COVID-19 jabs have been mounting with breakneck rapidity,” sharing COVID-19 jab death and injury data from various countries that “reveal deeply troubling patterns.”

Mercola continued, saying that “the reported rate of death from COVID-19 shots now exceeds the reported death rate of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years, and it’s about 500 times deadlier than the seasonal flu vaccine, which historically has been the most hazardous.”

Aside from the question of the safety of COVID-19 jabs, Harris’ admonition to get “vaccinated” for the sake of others is problematic because of widespread admission that the COVID-19 jabs do not prevent transmission of the virus.

While in Detroit, Harris spoke with Fox2, acknowledging that there was “hesitation” to receive the COVID-19 jabs in the area, where the vaccination rate was about 40 percent, as well as “mistrust of the government.”


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

Will COVID vaccines really bring us back to normal?

  coronavirus vaccine, kamala harris


Arizona audit reveals regular irregularities

Audits and election reform are necessary so that millions of voters can be confident our republic truly reflects the will of the voters. Despite all the media smears, the obfuscation and attacks from county officials and party leaders, these audits give hope to Americans desperate to see faith, family, and freedom restored in our nation.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 10:11 am EST
Featured Image
Arizona State Capital Kit Leong/Shutterstock
Matt Carpenter

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

July 21, 2021 (Family Research Council Action) – Election fraud is notoriously difficult to prove. Uncovering a massive criminal conspiracy to rig elections would be a first in American politics. Many voters lead busy lives. Between work, family, and other obligations, many Americans simply do not have time to look up changes to election rules or confirm where their precinct is, research the candidates, and more. So, some voters may inadvertently cast a ballot in the wrong precinct or manage ­– without ill intent – to register to vote after the deadline, or even cast a ballot without being registered to vote to begin with. Voters, after all, are human and humans make mistakes.

Unfortunately, there are many who do attempt to illegally vote or tamper with elections improperly. In fact, the Heritage Foundation has assembled a database documenting more than 1,200 known instances of election fraud. With voters split as to whether or not the 2020 election was fair, and an unprecedented number of last minute changes to election rules, millions of Americans want their elected officials to take seriously an audit of their state’s election results – and then act to put in place new laws and enforce existing laws to make sure it’s easy to vote and hard to cheat in future elections.

Considering the 2020 presidential election was decided by less than 43,000 votes across several swing states, these Americans have good reason to encourage an audit of their state or county's election system. Small amounts of fraud or irregularities here or there could have had dramatic consequences for the election outcome in a given state. The Arizona Senate was the first to take seriously their voters’ concerns and launched a forensic audit of Maricopa County’s election results. Now that preliminary findings are in, they raise some troubling questions about how the presidential election in the state’s largest county was conducted.

In a hearing last week, audit experts revealed some startling discrepancies from the Maricopa County audit. Among them was a revelation that some 74,000 mail-in ballots were counted in the state’s largest county, with no record of them having been sent to voters in the first place, and a discovery that signature verification standards were dramatically watered-down. It’s possible some number of voters picked up a mail-in ballot in person at their precinct and also dropped it off by hand – as opposed to having their mail-in ballot delivered to them and returned by them via mail carrier – but the fact that more than 74,000 mail-in ballots were counted than mailed out prior to the election raises alarms. Additionally, Doug Logan, CEO of Cyber Ninjas, the nonpartisan group conducting the audit, told Arizona senators at the hearing last Thursday:

“We have an affidavit that specifically stated that when mail-in ballots were received, that so many of them were received that the standard was reduced over time... there was originally 20 points of comparison on the signature and then after some time they were told to go to then points of comparison, then five. And then eventually they were just told to let every single mail-in ballot through.”

Loosening signature verification standards is another sign of trouble for the integrity of the county’s election results. Logan went on to note that Maricopa County officials are currently withholding mail-in ballot images, which can be used to determine any irregularities with signature matching. Watering down signature verification standards on election day, and then withholding evidence from the state legislature does not inspire confidence. Maricopa County officials want to assuage voters’ concerns about election integrity in their state.

Other shocking revelations from the Maricopa County audit revealed thousands of duplicate ballots without serial numbers were found in ballot boxes, more than 11,000 voters were able to vote without being registered to vote, and another 3,900 voters were able to vote after registering to vote after the October 15 deadline.

J. Christian Adams, president and general counsel of the Public Interest Legal Foundation was recently on “Washington Watch” with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins to discuss these revelations. Adams pointed out that “there is no question about it that things went wrong in Maricopa County.” He said that the likelihood these irregularities are evidence of an organized election fraud conspiracy is slim, adding, “...most election vulnerabilities and breakdowns are not part of a plot. They’re just what happens.”

His point is well taken and is informative for lawmakers across the country who are considering legislation to enhance their state’s election system. An audit is a great way for states to glean an understanding of what weaknesses exist in their election apparatus. Vast election fraud conspiracy or not, legislators should move to conduct an audit of their state’s election results if their constituents have concerns about election integrity and proceed with election law reforms and better enforcement of existing laws.

To that end, Arizona is not alone. Other states including GeorgiaWisconsinNew Hampshire, and Pennsylvania have begun making their own efforts to investigate instances of election irregularities in order to restore voters’ confidence in the state’s election system. In Georgia, another state where many voters see rampant irregularities – particularly in Fulton County – the Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives, David Ralston, has called for an independent audit of the 2020 presidential election in the county to “determine if any irregularities or willful fraud occurred.” If Georgia, another state that officially went to Biden by the narrowest possible of margins (just 12,000 votes in 2020), conducts an audit and discovers similarly disturbing results to Maricopa County’s audit, the cat will be out of the bag – voters across the country will demand more audits, more election integrity reforms, and will sign up in droves to be poll watchers all to protect the sanctity of the vote.

— 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 most recent election saw an unprecedented loosening of state election laws at the 11th hour, the reckless distribution of unsolicited mail-in ballot request forms, and private groups – like Mark Zuckerberg's Center for Tech and Civic Life – dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into Democrat-voter rich municipal areas, and more. If this is allowed to continue in future elections, it will only erode confidence in our national elections.

Audits and election reform are necessary so that millions of voters can be confident our republic truly reflects the will of the voters. Despite all the media smears, the obfuscation and attacks from county officials and party leaders, these audits give hope to Americans desperate to see faith, family, and freedom restored in our nation. Whether or not deliberate election fraud is uncovered, patching up weaknesses in state election systems will give voters’ confidence to come out in droves in the 2022 midterms – maybe that is why the Biden White House is smearing any attempt to look under the hood of these municipal election operations?

Reprinted with permission from Family Research Council Action

  2020 u.s. election, arizona election audit, maricopa county, presidential election


YouTube removes Family Research Council video about vaccinating minors against parental consent

Big tech isn’t going away, and what it categorizes as misinformation will only grow, especially when a government administration fuels the flames.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 8:00 am EST
Featured Image
YouTube censorship Sergei Elagin/Shutterstock
Tony Perkins Tony Perkins
By Tony Perkins

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

July 21, 2021 (Family Research Council) – That of which you shall not speak shall henceforth be called “misinformation.” No, that’s not a pithy quote from days gone by. It’s the new daily modus operandi of big tech. If they disagree with a position – or if they merely fear a position is disagreeable, the label “misinformation” is applied.

Case in point: YouTube removed a video of a “Washington Watch” discussion last week with Mary Holland, president and general counsel of Children’s Health Defense about the Washington, D.C. City Council’s move to authorize schools to administer vaccines to children as young as 11-years-old without parental consent. The now-banned video, which you can watch here on Rumble, was taken down by YouTube for allegedly offering “medical misinformation.”

Nevermind that there was no discussion whatsoever of medical advice – the substance of the interview was focused on parental rights, consent, and notification. Even so, as the video was removed, we were issued a warning that further violations would result in channel restrictions. FRC has appealed YouTube’s ruling and is awaiting a response, but we’re not holding our breath.

If you’re not shocked at this news, it’s not surprising. Ours is not an unfamiliar story, and it seems that many conservatives are simply waiting around wondering when the cancel man will come for them. A new Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll shows that, when asked if “Facebook is censoring posts more often from conservatives, more often from the left, or does it apply standards equally,” a whopping 42 percent said conservatives were censored more often. Six months ago, “election integrity” were the keywords that raised flags. Today, it’s anything that remotely mentions a vaccine and doesn’t carry the registered trademark of the CDC. There are no neutral discussions if Biden administration talking points are not followed.

Much of the big tech backlash may be directly fueled by the administration’s recent rhetoric on misinformation. It was just last week that President Biden said of Facebook, “They’re killing people. The only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated. And they’re killing people.” Biden clarified on Monday that, “Facebook isn’t killing people. These 12 people are out there giving misinformation. Anyone listening to it is getting hurt by it. It’s killing people. It’s bad information.”

Last week, the president’s press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters that the White House would be, “flagging problematic posts for Facebook that spread disinformation.” Whether or not Google's YouTube is aided in its flagging by the White House is unclear, but either way, the administration's message is crystal clear in its call for tech companies to get with the program.

— 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

Big tech isn’t going away, and what it categorizes as misinformation will only grow, especially when a government administration fuels the flames. For free speech to thrive, the need for robust alternative platforms (like Rumble, where you can still freely watch our banned video) is great. Proverbs 15:22 tells us, “Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.” When every voice is silenced except for one, success will indeed be difficult to find. To echo Senator James Lankford, “I’m more concerned with D.C controlling speech than I am of some people passing wrong information. Let people speak.”

Reprinted with permission from Family Research Council Action

  big tech, big tech censorship, dc city council, family research council, google, vaccines, youtube ban


School boards and the bees

Parents are now discovering the sex-ed in which first graders are being taught about masturbation, while Chicago school officials defend giving condoms to fifth graders as a matter of 'equity and justice.'
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 6:55 am EST
Featured Image
Screengrab from The War on Children
Tony Perkins Tony Perkins
By Tony Perkins

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

July 21, 2021 (Family Research Council) – The nation’s eyes are on critical race theory, but just as critical is what’s happening with sex ed. While parents everywhere rise up over the flood of woke curriculum, they’re also getting a good look behind the curtain at what their children are hearing about sex. And it’s just as shocking ­­– if not worse. It’s so graphic, one Minnesota state representative told a reporter, that her colleagues didn't even want to look at the examples on the House floor. “We couldn't show this on the 10 [o’clock] news,” she said, but “we want our fourth-grade children to be looking at it?”

No way, parents are saying. In New York, where one private school is in hot water for showing cartoons about masturbation to first graders, moms and dads are on the warpath. The $55,000-a-year primary school tried to suggest that families had “misinterpreted” the lessons. Don’t worry, Justine Ang Fonte (who was also responsible for the “porn literacy" class that made national headlines) insists. She doesn’t use the word “masturbation” in class, she promises, and her lessons teach kids not to “touch themselves in public.” As if this is somehow a relief to parents who are forking over college-level tuition rates for their six-year-old to learn words like “erection.” “She teaches kids about ‘consent’,” one mom fumed, “yet she has never gotten consent from parents about the sexually explicit, and age-inappropriate material about transgender to first-graders.”

In Chicago, home of the condoms-for-fifth-graders program, school officials insist that the effort is part of combatting racism. Sex education, the district’s Doctor Kenneth Fox argues, is now a matter of “equity and justice.” You just can’t make this stuff up. As a bonus, according to NPR, the book these children get includes full-color illustrations of naked people and sections on sexual orientation.

It’s out of control, Family Watch International’s Sharon Slater said on Friday’s “Washington Watch.” As extreme as Barack Obama’s approach to comprehensive sex education was, this administration is taking the extremism to a new level. We’ve had all of this build up over critical race theory, she agrees, and people are very engaged. And that’s the sort of energy that America needs talking about these unacceptable lessons creeping into our classrooms. Because, as Sharon pointed out, it’s only going to get worse.

“Little known to most parents is under the Obama administration, the U.S. government started spending over a $100 million dollars on comprehensive sexuality education, getting it to your children with your tax dollars. And now under the Biden administration – in fact, just this week – the House Appropriations Committee just approved $130 million dollars for this radical comprehensive sex ed which sexualizes children. We sometimes call it abortion rights, sexual rights, LGBT rights, indoctrination education or sexualization education” – something the American College of Pediatricians calls one of “the greatest assaults on the health and innocence of our children.”

Parents in Russell County, Virginia must have gotten that memo, because late last week they sent a resounding message to state leaders that they won’t tolerate this radicalism. The Commonwealth, which continues to have the most explosive education debate in the country, is the latest to mandate that districts not only throw open their bathroom and locker room doors to both genders, but that teachers and other staff use gender-preferred pronouns. The idea hasn’t gone over so well in the southern part of the state, where 500 people packed into the school board room and demanded an end to the radical LGBT programs trying to infiltrate the state's schools.

“We do not hate transgender people,” one parent insisted. “We do not hate homosexual people. We do not judge them... [T]he problem that we have in the community today is that [it's] being pushed on all of our children.” Another mom threatened to withdraw her son from the school if the policies were adopted. “My son will not be attending [the county] schools,” she vowed. “I will choose to homeschool him if this policy is adopted. It will not be easy to homeschool, as I’m sure it will be very financially tough, but I will stand for what is right.”

Attorney Josh Hetzler, who said his Founding Freedoms Law Center is prepared to sue, says that the entire policy is unconstitutional. Consider the “the likelihood of tangible harms to student’s bodily privacy, safety, and dignity in private spaces,” he argued. “[The] school board simply cannot adopt policies consistent with the existing model policy.”

Unlike northern Virginia, where Loudoun and Fairfax County officials stubbornly refuse to listen to local citizens, Russell’s school board unanimously rejected the rules – despite a threat from the Virginia Department of Education that there will be consequences. So be it, school board member Bob Gibson said. “I was elected by the people of this community, and I intend to stand up to protect every kid and do the will of the people of Russell County – and not that of an overreaching state government,” he said in a statement. “The most important thing we can do is protect every kid and to provide them with a safe and secure place to learn.”

— 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

If you’re wondering who’s driving these wildly inappropriate sex ed programs, look no farther than Planned Parenthood, Sharon says. “They actually brag about being the largest provider of comprehensive sexuality education or sex education in the United States... And they mostly have a monopoly on all the curriculum that is being ordered through the U.S. government. Those who are getting federal grants, part of that $100 million dollars, they’re usually getting their programs from [Planned Parenthood’s publishing arm called] ETR and Associates.” And incredibly, she explains, they market some of these pornographic curricula as “abstinence education,” when it’s actually a “how-to” book on everything from anal to oral sex.

It’s all a part of their broader marketing plan. Once Planned Parenthood hooks our children on sex, they’ll be able to sell them condoms, contraception, and abortions. “And we would encourage everybody to become a part of the solution and fight this in your state,” Sharon urges.

On her website, you can find out exactly what’s happening in your state – including where comprehensive sex ed programs are getting federal funding. Click on the USA map, and you’ll see all of your local laws related to parental rights and sex education. Sharon is determined to help parents understand what red flags to look for and how to document things so that when you speak out, you're completely prepared. And as far as she’s concerned, there’s never been a better time than now to stand up and say: not our children. Not on our watch.

Reprinted with permission from Family Research Council

  abortion, family research council, lgbt propaganda, planned parenthood, pornograpy, sex education


Why ‘the pandemic of the unvaccinated’ is a lie

There’s little logic in anything vaccine-pushers say nowadays.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 8:57 pm EST
Featured Image
Alex Wong / Getty Images
Celeste McGovern Follow Celeste
By Celeste McGovern

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – For days, the mainstream media have been playing a loop of reports that 99% of COVID-19 deaths are among unvaccinated people. Besides there being no data —there’s actually evidence that the opposite is true – it’s become the basis for a stream of dehumanizing propaganda that labels half of the American adult population and most children who haven’t taken experimental COVID-19 shots as “variant factories” and “incubators” of disease.

It’s frighteningly similar to early Nazi propaganda that referred to “filthy Jews” as spreaders of disease and stirred up irrational fear and hatred of millions of people in German society. It was a government message used to justify quarantining a people, starving them, and then annihilating them.

“Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated – and they’re killing people,” Joe Biden told reporters on Friday.

Rochelle Walensky, Director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said something similar earlier that day: “This is becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated.”

A lot of people have wanted to take off their masks for a long time and they oppose masking children, too. They’ve been forced to cover their faces by ‘freedom of choicers’ like Sebelius, to accommodate their neuroses and leftist desire to control others’ behavior, especially if isn’t sexually deviant or morally abhorrent behavior.

Two days later, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, announced that “99.5% of deaths right now from COVID-19 in our country are happening in the unvaccinated.” The only solution, he said, was for everyone to get vaccinated.

It was either a mantra – or an obvious orchestrated government propaganda program to make people take the shots. The three billion-dollar marketing program hadn’t appealed to 51% of Americans. The “filthy unvaccinated” storyline is useful for coercing those who don’t want the new drug. It’s a violation of the principles of the Nuremberg Code which was put in place after the human rights violations of Nazi Germany to protect people from taking part in medical experiments against their will. Since all coronavirus vaccines currently available in the U.S. are still in clinical trials for at least another year, they are experimental by definition.

Universally accepted principles like informed consent and medical freedom embedded in the Nuremberg Code don’t matter anymore, however. Now, vociferous champions of “freedom of choice” when it comes to the “right” of people to rip unborn babies from their mothers’ wombs are suddenly prying and dogmatic about other people’s medical choices. So Kathleen Sebelius, former stalwart “pro-choice” abortion enthusiast and secretary of Health and Human Services under Barack Obama said, for example, “It’s fine if you don’t choose to get vaccinated,” but “you may not come to work.”

“You may not have access to a situation where you’re going to put my grandchildren in jeopardy, where you might kill them, or you might put them in a situation where they’re going to carry the virus to someone in a high-risk position,” Sebelius told CNN host Erin Burnett.  

Never mind that grandchildren – those under 18 years of age – have a 0.002% chance of dying from COVID even if they are infected. And some grandparents in America would rather die than force their grandchildren to take an experimental vaccine – their grandchildren face higher odds of dying or developing a lifelong heart condition like myocarditis, a serious blood clotting disorder, or a neurological condition from a vaccine than from the coronavirus. Some grandparents would rather protect their children before themselves. If Sebelius wants her grandchildren vaccinated with an experimental drug that has 11,000 deaths reported with it in eight months, she is free to do so.

“I want to take off my mask,” Sebelius said.

“I want to be able to live my life with vaccination, and right now, I’m being impinged on by people who say ‘I don’t want to get vaccinated,’” she said. “It’s fine. I want them to maybe have a limitation on where they can go and who they can possibly infect.”

A lot of people have wanted to take off their masks for a long time and they oppose masking children, too. They’ve been forced to cover their faces by “freedom of choicers” like Sebelius, to accommodate their neuroses and leftist desire to control others’ behavior, especially if isn’t sexually deviant or morally abhorrent behavior. Sebelius wants others to mask and vaccinate their children to protect her, and she thinks children can be dismembered in utero if they threaten someone’s lifestyle.

There’s little logic in anything vaccine-pushers say nowadays. Either the vaccine protects you against the disease, or it doesn’t. If Sebelius knows she can still get and spread the disease – the vaccine doesn’t prevent getting it (more on this to come) or transmitting it – then how can she blame the unvaccinated for spread? If her vaccine isn’t up to snuff, why force that choice on everyone else, too? But there are other reasons to dismiss the neurotic fear propaganda about the “filthy unvaccinated” of leftists like Biden and Sebelius.

99 percent?

The Surgeon General’s statement that 99.5 percent of coronavirus deaths are in the unvaccinated materialized out of thin air and dodgy data. It turns out it’s based on math by a couple of Associated Press reporters that involved some crude calculations – the kind done on a bar napkin – looking at reported deaths from COVID in the month of May and some number, perhaps from a CDC report on the number of COVID deaths in the fully vaccinated, which was “about” 150. Since the AP report didn’t source their data, it’s a guessing game to figure out how they came to this factoid that has since been repeated by every leftist media chain and Biden administrator. The reporters did update their story to correct the number of hospital admissions for coronavirus from 853,000 to 107,000, and the percentage of hospitalized people who had been vaccinated to 1.1%, not 0.1%. Since coronavirus cases in the vaccinated are seriously underreported and so are vaccine side-effects and deaths, the 99% number is simply not real.

The CDC stopped counting COVID-19 cases in the vaccinated

The trouble is, a lot of vaccinated people in the U.S. – tens of thousands of them – are getting COVID after their 94% effective shots. By April 30, the CDC reported that there were 10,262 COVID “breakthrough” cases among those who had been fully vaccinated at least two weeks earlier. They didn’t include those who had received only one shot or count those who had the second shot five or 10 days earlier.  

And they knew this was “likely a substantial undercount of all SARS-CoV-2 infections among fully vaccinated persons.” But rather than try to determine the real numbers, the CDC announced that they were no longer going to count cases of the coronavirus in the vaccinated if they didn’t wind up hospitalized or dead.

How convenient.

By April 30, 160 vaccinated people had died of COVID. A few days later, the CDC updated the data to say that 535 fully vaccinated people had died of the infection. As of July 12, 5,492 patients with COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infection were hospitalized, including 1,063 who died.

— 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

If the CDC knew that more than 10,000 fully vaccinated people were COVID-positive by the end of April and that was a serious underestimate of the real numbers, and now they have stopped counting so they have no idea how many vaccinated people are infected, how can they now say that it’s the unvaccinated who are spreading disease?

Post-mortem in vaccinated COVID-19 victim

We know from the first – and apparently only – post-mortem study of a fully vaccinated person who died of COVID that he had a robust COVID antibody response – the measure of vaccine success. But he was dead.

He had detectable levels of viral mRNA in every organ tested and had what appeared to be a transmissible infection. So how can the CDC blame the unvaccinated for spreading COVID when the science says the vaccinated can be infected and transmit infection?

In countries that do count the data, it’s the vaccinated who are dying disproportionately

The CDC stopped counting a critical pandemic parameter, but other countries did not. The U.K. data on “variants of concern” reveals that there were 92 deaths of unvaccinated people compared to 163 among the vaccinated (most of them fully vaccinated). These mortality figures are miniscule in a country of 66 million people. But if you’re talking vaccine success, when you compare rates of deaths between the two groups from their case numbers, it’s the vaccinated who come out worse off – with odds of death nearly nine times higher than the unvaccinated.

In Israel, it was reported June 29 that the vaccine was failing and most new cases of COVID were in the vaccinated. Roughly 60% of the patients in serious conditions had been vaccinated and, according to Hebrew University researchers advising the government, around 90% of newly infected people over the age of 50 are fully vaccinated.

If in countries like Israel, with higher vaccination rates than most of the world, it is the vaccinated who are infected, and the vaccinated can get and spread disease, then it’s time to stop the “filthy unvaccinated” propaganda and let people make their own medical choices free of coercion.


  biden administration, biden regime, coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccines, forced vaccination, joe biden, kathleen sebelius, masks, vaccines, variants


‘Male-appearing genitalia’: transgender propaganda reaches next level in LA Times column

Progressive activists want to gaslight women into thinking they are the aggressors in the situation.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 5:30 pm EST
Featured Image
The man shown here reproved a woman who was outraged after witnessing a man expose his genitals in a women's-only area of the spa. This man insisted that the man who had displayed his penis is 'transgender.' Twitter
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Last month, I covered the story of a spa in California that insisted a biological man identifying as a woman had the right to enter the female section and expose himself to women and young girls. The staff of the spa were confronted by a furious African American woman, who demanded to know why this was permissible — other women joined her. One asked for her money back. One male bystander told the women to stop being so bigoted and permit the penis-packing “trans woman” to join them.

The reaction of the media and progressive activists has been revealing. Conservative media outlets, predictably, have highlighted this as a literal example of the emperor having no clothes and all of us being able to see that he is a he. Progressive activists are insisting that the spa did the right thing in defending the “trans woman,” who was clearly the victim in this situation. The faux crime of “misgendering” is apparently a bigger deal than little girls being exposed to male genitals.

This is a key tactic of progressive activists. In the face of an obviously disgusting incident — a man exposing himself in a private area with small girls — double down, and counter-accuse those objecting to the behavior. In short, gaslight women into thinking they are the aggressors in the situation. Gaslighting, for those unaware of the term, means manipulating someone by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.

A prime example of this is the editorial published by the Los Angeles Times in response to the incident, titled “Transgender spa customers have the same rights as everyone else.”

Trans rights, the editorial states, are “fortunately gaining acceptance in many corners … but society’s recognition of basic rights for one group also sometimes causes clashes with other groups that have been marginalized or disempowered.” That said, there can only be one response to the black woman’s outrage according to the LA Times—and read this sentence very carefully:

There is no doubt that Wi Spa did the right thing in defending the right of a transgender customer to be nude in the women’s area, even though the sight of male-appearing genitalia discomfited at least one female customer, who complained at the front desk. As a public-serving business, Wi Spa had to follow California law forbidding discrimination against transgender people. What’s extraordinary isn’t that the spa’s employees followed the law but that this led to violence outside as opponents and supporters of the law clashed over the weekend.

Read that again—a penis is referred to as “male-appearing genitalia.” As in a female penis. “Male-appearing genitalia.” This is next-level gaslighting. You are not supposed to believe your lying eyes. Furthermore, when the LA Times does use the term “penis” later on in the editorial, it is to tell women to get over it:

Everyone — transgender customers, members of every faith and women who are upset by the sight of penises — has the right to use the spa and other public accommodations. It just happens that in this case, the public accommodation also includes nudity…But no one has an absolute right to feel comfortable all the time. People have a right to use the spa, but that doesn’t include with it a guarantee that they all will feel at ease with everything they see.

Fortunately, the editorial continues, there “is reason to think that a lot of the hullabaloo over these situations will ease over time” because young people are more pro-trans.

In short, everyone calm down. Seeing penises in a female changing area isn’t a big deal because this was merely “male-appearing genitalia.” It is also not a big deal if young girls were present, because this sort of “hullabaloo” will be over the moment these young people apply their ideology to their comfort levels in change rooms.

As I’ve said before, the challenge of the trans community to the country is a simple one: Who are you going to believe — us or your lying eyes?

  california, gaslighting, la times, lgbt, transgenderism, wi spa


33-day Fatima consecration by visionary Lucia introduced

Drawing from the many personal experiences she went through, Theresa Gray describes to me how and what led her to begin this initiative.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 1:28 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In this episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, I speak with Theresa Gray, founder and organizer of Clay Ministries, a group dedicated to promoting devotion to the rosary and the Consecration to Our Lady of Fatima. What makes their consecration distinct from others, such as True Devotion by St. Louis de Montfort, is that they have directly incorporated the message of Fatima given by Mary to Sister Lucia.

Drawing from the many personal experiences she went through, Gray describes to me how and what led her to begin this initiative, and why she hopes it will bring joy to people and take them closer to Jesus Christ through Our Lady.

Similarly to other Marian consecrations, the Fatima Consecration involves 33 days of reflections and mediations, beginning with an introduction and concluding with the consecration itself. What makes this unique is that the mediations are the 33 calls which Sister Lucia said Our Lady of Fatima invited us all to follow. It is based on Lucia’s book "Calls."

Gray says that they were given permission by the postulator and keeper of the messages of Fatima to formulate the consecration, and that it was approved by Bishop Roger Foys of the Diocese of Covington, KY, and Archbishop Dennis Schnurr of the Diocese of Cincinnati. Even though they have not done any consecrations since the COVID lockdowns began, they will resume next month. For more information and to sign up, click here.

Theresa Gray highlights the main takeaways of the devotion and consecration to Our Lady of Fatima, which are based on the message the Mother of God gave to the three children in Portugal. She tells me that, “the message of Fátima was a call to holiness” in the individual, the family, the Church, and the entire society. “Our Lady today is continuing to say, through everyone that understands the Fatima message, bring them to me. Let me convert them with grace, and let me take them to Jesus,” Gray adds.

Furthermore, she details the importance of praying and working for an end to the sin of abortion, which is the sin Mary grieves most about. Gray says that “abortion is the one thing that we need to consider that we must stop offending God with, and I believe that in doing the consecration, people can be converted.”

I strongly encourage you to consider joining the Fatima Consecration which will begin on September 4th, is fully online, and includes a less than 8-minute meditational video based on the writings of Sr. Lucia for each of the 33 days. You can register by going to and clicking the sign-up button.

Just as Theresa Gray hopes, I too pray that this will be a call to holiness for each and every member of the faithful, and will lead to immeasurable graces for the world and the Church.

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].


* 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, consecration to our lady of fatima, fatima consecration, john-henry westen, john-henry westen show, our lady of fatima, the john-henry westen show, theresa gray


Archbishop Viganò: Vaccines made with fetal tissue are a ‘human sacrifice of innocent victims offered to Satan’

'The most innocent and defenseless creature, the baby in the womb in the third month of gestation, is sacrificed and dismembered in order to extract tissue from his still palpitating body with which to produce a non-cure, a non-vaccine, which not only does not heal from the virus, but in all likelihood causes a greater percentage of death than Covid itself, especially in the elderly or those who are sick.'
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 1:00 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò speaks at the Rome Life Forum in May 2018.
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in a foreword to a book on the problem of the coronavirus vaccine, decries the satanic nature of this vaccine using tissue of aborted babies in its production and testing. For this Italian prelate, the vaccine is a tool of the globalist ideology which is “anti-human, anti-religious, and antichristic.”

Viganò sees that “abortion is proposed by the Satanists as a true and proper religious rite,” arguing that in this Satanic world view, through an abortion-tainted vaccine, one becomes a member of the Satanic anti-church. He writes that Satan claims, “through the pharmaceutical companies that use fetal tissue from abortions to manufacture a so-called vaccine that is presented in the delirium of Covid-19 as a sacrament of salvation by which one is incorporated into the ‘mystical body’ of Satan, the globalist anti-church.”

Mors Tua Vita Mea (Your death is my life) is the title of the Italian book on the abortion-tainted coronavirus vaccines to which Archbishop Viganò has contributed a foreword (see excerpts of it in English translation below). Edited by Professor Massimo Viglione, the book contains essays also by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and LifeSite’s editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen. Its subtitle is: “The End Does Not Justify the Means.”

For Archbishop Viganò, there is no doubt that coronavirus vaccines can never justify the killing of unborn babies. On the contrary, this vaccine seems to be used as a means to getting us more and more used to the killing of babies for the sake of humanity. He states:

...we cannot fail to see how instrumental it [the vaccine] is, precisely in its “mystical” value, to the collective acceptance of human sacrifice as normal and indeed necessary: the most innocent and defenseless creature, the baby in the womb in the third month of gestation, is sacrificed and dismembered in order to extract tissue from his still palpitating body with which to produce a non-cure, a non-vaccine, which not only does not heal from the virus, but in all likelihood causes a greater percentage of death than Covid itself, especially in the elderly or those who are sick.

Below is the excerpt of Archbishop Viganò's foreword to the book Mors Tua Vita Mea, published with kind permission by Professor Massimo Viglione:

Aures habent, et non audient.
Ps 113

The barbarism in which our society finds itself is now evident: its values have been gradually erased as hateful vestiges of an extinct world, to the advantage of the delusions of globalist ideology, which shows itself to be ever more anti-human, anti-religious, and antichristic. The most antithetical principle of this infernal barbarism with respect to Christian civilization is infanticide, the human sacrifice of innocent victims offered to Satan; and despite the horror of seeing it brazenly admitted, we cannot be surprised if abortion is proposed by the Satanists as a true and proper religious rite, to which protection must be given in the name of freedom of worship. The ancient pagan rituals – omnes dii gentium demonia, says the Psalm – live again today in the sacrificial offering that unfortunate mothers believe can be claimed as a right.

If the firstborn of Israel belong to the Lord, the simia Dei demands much more of the firstborn and even claims them through the pharmaceutical companies that use fetal tissue from abortions to manufacture a so-called vaccine that is presented in the delirium of Covid-19 as a sacrament of salvation by which one is incorporated into the “mystical body” of Satan, the globalist anti-church. On the other hand, the “liturgical” connotation of the pandemic intentionally echoes signs and symbols proper to the True Religion in such a way as to deceive even the simple and push them to conform to a collective cult that exempts them from making decisions independently and binds them to an uncritical obedience. We cannot forget the funeral processions of military trucks, the contradictory and intolerant attitude of the Covid priests, the health magisterium of the “experts,” the inquisition against the denier “heretics,” and the fideistic adherence to the most grotesque superstitions passed off as science by virologist sorcerers and television vestals.

The gene serum that is called a vaccine, as scientists and specialists have very well demonstrated and as its producers themselves admit, does not guarantee immunity; it does not rule out serious short-term and long-term side effects; it is not effective against certain variants of Covid; it does not eliminate the need for masks and social distancing; in the majority of cases the number of positive tests increases, and so media terrorism and the tightening of containment measures also increases. Proposed as a panacea, the so-called “vaccine” has turned out only to be the source of enormous, scandalous profits for Big Pharma and, at the same time, serves as a pretext to impose health passports and other systems for controlling the masses and limiting natural liberties. 

But alongside this obvious uselessness of the “vaccine” – a uselessness that any doctor not subservient to the system would have considered from the beginning, since the Corona viruses are susceptible to mutation – we cannot fail to see how instrumental it is, precisely in its “mystical” value, to the collective acceptance of human sacrifice as normal and indeed necessary: the most innocent and defenseless creature, the baby in the womb in the third month of gestation, is sacrificed and dismembered in order to extract tissue from his still palpitating body with which to produce a non-cure, a non-vaccine, which not only does not heal from the virus, but in all likelihood causes a greater percentage of death than Covid itself, especially in the elderly or those who are sick.

But who are the mothers who, denying their very nature, agree to kill their own child? The majority of them are women in their first pregnancy, unaware of the horror they are about to commit and the remorse that will accompany them forever. Here are the first-born to be consecrated to Satan: the children of unfortunate mothers and spoiled girls, who discover what it means to be mothers precisely in not wanting to be so, instead perverting their femininity by reducing it to a bargaining chip or an instrument of ephemeral enjoyment, in the name of rights which they claim for themselves but which they permit themselves to deny to the creatures they carry in their womb. The non serviam repeats itself inexorably every time the obedience of the fiat is refused and the will of the Almighty is rebelled against.

In abortion, Satan achieves the greatest injury to God: he offends Him as Creator, making the mother the murderer of her own child; he offends Him as Lord, usurping the right of life and death over innocent creatures and claiming the right to violate the Fifth Commandment with impunity; he offends Him as Redeemer, nullifying the fruits of Christ's Passion for creatures killed without the grace of Baptism; he offends Him as Father, while also vilifying the Sacred Maternity of the Most Holy Virgin.

Great confusion reigns in this painful phase of the history of the Church: the inaction or abuse of the authority of the Hierarchy, along with the betrayal of so many false pastors and mercenaries, does not help to dispel the confusion of the faithful, and indeed the Shepherds even feed the confusion with partial, discordant and contradictory directions. In this too we can realize the gravity of the situation, and how much the defection of the Pastors is a necessary premise for the establishment of the kingdom of the Antichrist. If the Pope and the Bishops had a minimum of fear of God, they would not try to justify with unworthy sophistry a vaccine that in order to be produced requires stem cells obtained from voluntarily aborted fetuses. The pretium sanguinis would be enough to make them not even take it into consideration, but perhaps among the beneficiaries of that pretium there are also Prelates who care more about the hypocritical praise of the enemies of Christ than the heroic witness of the Faith. [...]

  abortion, carlo maria viganò, catholic, coronavirus vaccine, coronavirus vaccines


Yes, Twitter actually blocked me for this

Dangerous lines are being crossed on 'inconvenient' historical facts.
Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 11:54 am EST
Featured Image
Michael L. Brown Michael L. Brown Follow Dr. Michael
By Dr. Michael Brown

July 21, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – On Tuesday morning, when I went to use my Twitter account, I was greeted by a different screen than normal. It contained one single tweet of mine, beneath which was a large red button labeled “Remove.” I had violated Twitter guidelines, because of which I was blocked from using my account. The two options were to remove the offending tweet or to appeal. I chose to appeal.

To give the relevant background, over the weekend, I had posted a comment on both Twitter and Facebook, saying, “To those who are outraged over the fact that many Americans still choose not to be vaccinated, do you honestly believe that if those people were convinced the vaccines were perfectly safe in the long term and would save lives that most of them would not be vaccinated immediately?” (This is the Facebook link; I would give you the Twitter link except that, well, I can’t, since I’m blocked from accessing my account.)

I had first posted the comment on Twitter, where it generated a lively discussion, after which my wife Nancy said to me, “You should post it on Facebook and see what happens.”

She suggested this because she has noticed how Facebook has largely strangled the distribution of my articles and posts on cultural and political topics, to the point that we’ve seen a reduction of as much as 90 percent (if not more at times).

What would happen, she wondered, if I posted this same comment on Facebook?

To our pleasant surprise, the post generated about 1.4 thousand likes and 1.2 thousand comments and, to this moment, it has not been removed. (Of course, the ubiquitous Facebook public service announcement is attached to the post: “Visit the COVID-19 Information Center for vaccine resources. Get Vaccine Info.”)

I also made my own public position clear on Facebook: “For the record, I have encouraged everyone to do the research and make informed decisions for themselves. I have not advocated a particular position for others to take.”

Back over at Twitter, a pastor with the last name Mather, making him a distant descendant of the early American Christian leader Cotton Mather (1663-1728) responded to my tweet. He pointed out that Cotton Mather believed in the integration of science and faith, getting vaccinated himself. (I would supply the direct quote with a link to the tweet except that, well, I can’t, since I can’t access my account.)

In response I tweeted, “@jjmather Interestingly, Jonathan Edwards died in 1758 as a result of the smallpox vaccine he received.”

That was it. Nothing about COVID (obviously). Nothing about vaccines today. No misinformation. No conspiracy theories. Nothing in violation of Twitter guidelines at all. Not a word.

I simply related an interesting and relevant historical fact in response to the comment about Cotton Mather. (To be specific, Edwards died of a small pox inoculation rather than a vaccine. As explained on the Historical Horizons website, “Edwards embraced the new science of his day, especially new techniques being used to combat diseases. When small pox swept into Princeton, New Jersey during the winter of 1757-58, Edwards, the local college’s newly minted president, got a shot from a reputable doctor. Thirty-seven days later Jonathan Edwards was dead from the shot.” And, “Actually it was not a shot. The accepted procedure involved rubbing matter removed from a pustule into a small incision made between the thumb and index finger.”)

What, then, was my crime? Clicking on the link provided by Twitter, I was directed to a page explaining that, among many other potential violations, posting misleading information about COVID-19 was a violation of Twitter policy. When I clicked on the link supplying more detailed information, I was brought to this page, stating, “As the global community faces the COVID-19 pandemic together, Twitter is helping people find reliable information, connect with others, and follow what’s happening in real time.”

There, under the heading, “Protecting the public conversation,” the following 9 bulleted items were listed:

  • Clarifying how we assess misleading information
  • Updating our approach to misleading information
  • Broadening our guidance on unverified claims
  • Our ads policy for COVID-19
  • Broadening our definition of "harm"
  • An update on our content moderation work
  • Automated technology and what to expect if you file a report
  • Additional triage, quality assurance, and ongoing review of Twitter's rules
  • Our zero-tolerance approach to platform manipulation

Can anyone tell me how posting a factual comment about the death of Jonathan Edwards in 1758 is in violation of any of these terms? Would any rational human being assume that I was saying, “I’m warning you not to get the COVID vaccine in 2021 seeing that Edwards died 263 years ago from a failed vaccination attempt”? (Does anyone think that medicine and technology have not advanced dramatically since 1758?)

But today, it appears that even posting historical facts that are deemed inconvenient is a challenge to Big Tech’s iron grip.

Perhaps the cause of Edwards’ death will now be scrubbed from our history books too? (The History Extra website ran an April 2020 article titled, “Rewriting the past: the history that inspired Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.”)

Because I only have 42.8 thousand Twitter followers it was not urgent that I was able to access my account again. And so, for sake of principle (and as a teachable moment), I chose to appeal the ruling. (As I write, about 12 hours later, there has been no response from Twitter, other than to acknowledge my appeal.)

That being said, because the tweet in itself was not vitally important to me, should Twitter drag its feet in responding, I’ll likely remove the tweet and reactivate my account. For me, this tweet is not a hill worth dying on.

But unless Twitter fails to apologize to me in writing, saying that this was an error on their account, we now have yet another example of the degree to which dangerous lines are being crossed.

Not only are dissenting opinions not welcome, but inconvenient historical facts are banned as well.

To quote Orwell’s 1984, “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

  big tech, censorship, cotton mather, covid-19, covid-19 vaccine, free speech, history, social media bias, twitter

Featured Image

Episodes Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 6:14 pm EST

33-day Fatima consecration by visionary Lucia introduced

By John-Henry Westen   Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

In this episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, John-Henry speaks with Theresa Gray, founder and organizer of Clay Ministries, a group dedicated to promoting devotion to the rosary and the Consecration to Our Lady of Fatima.

What makes their consecration special from others is that they have directly incorporated the message of Fatima given by Mary to Sister Lucia. Click here for more information and to sign-up:

Featured Image

EpisodesCommentary, Faith, Freedom, Politics - U.S., Population Control Wed Jul 21, 2021 - 12:12 pm EST

How to be more self-sufficient: Health Ranger Mike Adams shares tips


  brighteon, health ranger, ladies of lifesite, lifesite, lifesite podcast, lols, mike adams, natural news

In this week's episode, Rebekah is joined by LifeSite's Meghan Mulherin and Mike Adams (known to many as the Health Ranger and owner of and

Mike talks about putting our full trust and faith in Our Savior, while also setting yourself and your family up for success and self-sufficiency. He speaks about easy projects like starting a garden - whether you choose in-ground, raised beds, hydroponic, or aeroponic, helping you save money and have healthy veggies and fruits at your fingertips.

Whether you're an avid gardener or can barely keep a houseplant alive, this is an inspiring episode filled with nuggets of gold!

Please remember to take our survey to let us know what you want to hear! It takes less than 5 minutes.

Click here to receive email updates from the Ladies. We promise not to spam. Just friends spreading some love your way.

Please feel free to reach out to us anytime at [email protected] If you’d like to reach Mike or any of our other guests, please use the same email address and we will be glad to pass it on to them. 

Until next week. 

Lots of love,
The Ladies