All of yesterday's articles

November 24, 2020


News

Opinion

Blogs

Episodes

Video

The Pulse


News

Pennsylvania gov shuts down alcohol sales at restaurants, bars on Thanksgiving eve

Gov. Tom Wolf's ban will hurt small businesses owners on one of their most profitable nights of the year.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 9:00 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Victoria Gisondi Follow
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In yet another devastating blow to small business owners, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf banned bars and restaurants from selling alcohol on one of the most profitable evenings of the year, the night before Thanksgiving. 

“For bars and restaurants, this night has the potential to be as big as St. Patrick’s Day or Super Bowl Sunday,” explained Upserve.com. “The informal holiday got its nickname ‘Drinksgiving’ from the uptick in bar patrons joining together after months — or years — to indulge in their drink of choice before celebrating Thanksgiving. With practically everyone having Thanksgiving Day off work and no reason to wake up before football, it’s clear why this night has become a cultural phenomenon.”

Not so in Pennsylvania this year. Instead, alcohol sales will be prohibited from 5 p.m. Wednesday night until 8 a.m. Thanksgiving morning, which won't help restaurant owners recover any losses from Wolf’s earlier lockdowns.

Pennsylvania restaurants that survived earlier lockdown measures have been operating at 25 percent to 50 percent capacity.

Restaurants have already been banned from serving alcohol after 10 p.m. since summer. Additional restrictions include no alcohol sales without the purchase of meals, no barstools or seating around bar areas, and a requirement to complete an online self-certification vowing to comply to all public health safety guidelines and orders for restaurants that want to expand to 50 percent from 25 percent seating capacity.

The 10 p.m. alcohol curfew imposed during the summer was already hurting businesses. The Morning Call reported that pub owner Bert Charlie complained that Wolf’s move meant establishments whose main revenue is alcohol sales would have little chance to make money after 10 p.m. 

“It is really going to hurt the small barroom,” said Charlie, whose business is in Whitehall Township.

He quipped, “What Gov. Wolf is saying is coronavirus will disappear but then come back at 10 p.m.”

Now, struggling businesses have to contend with this latest setback because Wolf apparently believes banning alcohol at bars the night before Thanksgiving can control the spread of COVID-19 in Pennsylvania.

“That’s what we should be focused on, not whether we want to get transitory benefit from going out with friends … and having some drinks,” Wolf said. “Let’s forgo that this one time, and if we do that and all these other things, we’re going to get back to life as we really want to and go to the bar anytime we want.”  

Wolf has forced no such drastic mitigation efforts on shopping malls or stores such as Target and Walmart, which have significantly increased foot traffic during the holidays – and especially on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving.

The Pennsylvania Licensed Beverage and Tavern Association issued a statement after Wolf’s latest restrictions. “We get the importance of the keeping patrons safe, and our industry works hard to do so every day,” it said. “But what we don’t get is why there has been no significant financial help to assist our small business taverns and licensed restaurants survive. As this crisis continues, more small businesses are closing while their employees lose jobs.”


  alcohol, bars, covid-19, curfew, lockdowns, pennsylvania, restaurants, thanksgiving, tom wolf

News

Bishop Strickland: The USCCB ‘doesn’t speak for’ me in congratulating Joe Biden

Strickland states that he 'felt obligated to speak out for my flock' because both the US bishops' conference and Planned Parenthood expressed congratulations to Joe Biden.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 9:00 pm EST
Featured Image
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — In the latest episode of The Bishop Strickland Show, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas addresses the recent congratulatory message from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop to Joe Biden after the media prematurely declared him “president-elect.”

“A dark cloud has descended on this nation,” Bishop Strickland said in a recent tweet, “when the USCCB and Planned Parenthood speak in unison of a Biden-Harrison adminstration that supports the slaughter of innocents by abortion for all 9 months of pregnancy." 

That policy is “anti-Catholic [and] what Planned Parenthood stands for.”

“A Biden-Harris administration [would] ... make sure that abortion is available from conception to the nine months,” he said today.

His Excellency also mentioned that “the USCCB speaks as an organization but they don't speak for every individual bishop.”

Thus, Strickland states, I “felt obligated to speak out for my flock” during this crucial moment.

Strickland announced that he “will always speak as a voice for those unborn children that are being slaughtered...[becausevery few are speaking up for them, and the nation is embracing [abortion] more and more vehemently.” 

Strickland also highlighted the root cause of much of the moral errors in today's society, namely that “the Sexual Revolution has really infected the world and distorted so much.”

Due to YouTube suspending LifeSite’s channel for a week, this week’s episode will be available for viewing on LifeSite’s Rumble channel by following this link. 

Tune into The Bishop Strickland Show, co-hosted by Terry Barber of Virgin Most Powerful Radio, every Tuesday at 9:00 p.m. ESTClick here to watch all past episodes. 


  bishop joseph strickland, bishop strickland, joe biden, kamala harris, the bishop strickland show, us bishops, us bishops conference, usccb

News

Swiss health economist proposes denying healthcare to ‘corona rebels’

‘It often takes a penalty for the system to work.’
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:22 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
David McLoone
By

SWITZERLAND, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A Swiss health expert has suggested that “skeptics” of the coronavirus might be denied “their right to intensive care,” saying that “it often takes a penalty for the system to work.” 

In an interview with Swiss news outlet Tamedia, health economist Willy Oggier shared his controversial thoughts on what measures might be put in place to ease the burden on a stretched ICU during an influx of coronavirus-infected patients.

According to Oggier, “corona [skeptics] forfeit their right to an acute bed or an intensive care place in the event of bottlenecks” and that “these people [should] be recorded by name and, in case of doubt, not be given an intensive care bed.” 

It is unclear exactly who Oggier would classify as coronavirus “skeptics” or “rebels.”

Oggier denied that this system punishes those who criticize the government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak, but rather believes that medical professionals will have to make a choice of who to give empty beds to, and that it is “fairer when the self-proclaimed corona rebel is left behind than when it simply hits the oldest patient in the room.” To bolster this statement, Oggier said that “it often takes a penalty for the system to work.”

Oggier went on to say that, although at present it would not be appropriate to mandate a vaccine, after the side effects had been studied mandatory vaccination would make sense. 

Many world leaders are also refusing to rule out mandating citizens be forced to take a coronavirus vaccine. The New York State Bar Association recently advised the state of New York to make vaccination mandatory for all residents.

In lockstep with many European governments, Oggier strongly supports the wearing of face masks in public, decrying a situation he witnessed at Zurich’s main railway station, where citizens supposedly did not heed the police’s request to don a mask. His reaction was that “[t]his can not be!” The claim that masks offer a sure safeguard against the spread of coronavirus is disputed by numerous reputable health professionals.

Oggier also said that, from an economic standpoint, it would be impossible to control the rate of spread of the virus without strict measures in place: “the looser the measures, the more strictly they have to be enforced. Otherwise we won't get the infection numbers under control quickly enough.” The economist also suggested that, in order to swiftly bring about compliance, “[a]n immediate legal basis is needed for hefty fines that can be issued without a long process.”

When asked how this system might be put in place, Oggier responded: “[q]uite simply: Anyone who is reported because they deliberately disregard the rules of distance and hygiene should be responsible for their actions.” Meanwhile, other studies have shown that lockdowns can negatively impact health, education, and employment.

— 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

  coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, healthcare, switzerland, willy oggier

News

New Mexico closes grocery stores in lockdown ‘reset’ as food insecurity grows

Businesses ‘with four or more rapid responses of COVID-19 cases reported within in a 14-day period’ have to shut down for two weeks.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 5:59 pm EST
Featured Image
Shutterstock
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Amidst rising unemployment and worries about sourcing food, the governor of New Mexico forced grocery stores to close as part of the latest COVID-19 lockdown.

Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s latest rules in the New Mexico “resethave resulted in “businesses with four or more rapid responses of COVID-19 cases reported within in a 14-day period to close for two weeks.”

Grisham’s new rules stipulate that essential stores, including grocery stores, must operate on a reduced schedule, “have no more than 75 customers inside or exceed 25 percent of maximum occupancy at any time, whichever is smaller,” and must also close by 10 p.m.

The Washington Examiner reports that by Monday afternoon, “[m]ore than 25 essential businesses were shut down,” due to positive tests for COVID-19 among staff. Of this number, “nearly half were grocery stores or major retailers.”

When asked to justify her laws, Grisham answered last week, “You can’t have a grocery store or another big box store that sells groceries if all of the employees or the vast majority of them have COVID.”

However, despite Grisham referring to “all” or “the vast majority” of employees being infected with COVID-19, her new laws order the closure of any business “following the occurrence of four (4) or more” positive cases of the virus “within a fourteen (14) day period.”

KOB 4 reports that people living in southeast New Mexico “said they’re worried a lack of options in rural communities will force people to travel out of state or to stand in line at other stores and cause the virus to spread.”

One of Gov. Grisham’s spokesmen said, “The state is not forcing anyone to stand in a crowded line, as you suggest,” and that talk of long lines outside stores was simply “politically motivated,” and even a “Republican talking point.”

In response, the Pinon Post provided numerous photographs, documenting the lines of people queuing outside stores, both before and after the governor’s edict. The Pinon Post described the statements as “inaccurate” and “ignoring reality.”

The Republican Party of New Mexico also responded to the governor’s spokesman, saying, “Visit any grocery store in NM & then tell all those people in line that they are just ‘Republican talking points’.”

The governor’s office sent a press statement to KOB 4 in reference to the story: “There is no community in the state of New Mexico where COVID-19 closures have closed off all food and water or medicine options for any community or group of people. Every single community where the virus is forcing closures has alternate stores, alternate resources. Moreover, stores are only ordered closed for the protection of public safety when the store's staff members have an abundance of COVID-19 infections among them — surely you and everyone in New Mexico can agree that not one of us would like to be shopping among staff that are contagious.”

A study by Feeding America showed that New Mexico was ranked 5th most concerning on the chart, with 434,570 people projected to be without proper access to food this year. Of that predicted number, 162,960 would be children. The figures show a rise of just under 120,000 people with “food insecurity” compared to the previous year.

— 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

While lockdowns are being reintroduced across the globe in supposed attempts to combat the spread of COVID-19, studies are proving that such measures are ineffective. Conducted by the Heritage Foundation, a paper in July examined the United States, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Italy, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Iran. The study found that lockdowns “are less effective at combating COVID-19 than strategies more narrowly targeted at those most in danger.”

More recently, the American Institute for Economy Research (AIER) issued a report re-affirming the findings that lockdowns cause widespread damage to normal life. The AIER showed that lockdowns significantly detrimentally affected mental health, unemployment figures, crime rates and healthcare.


  covid-19, lockdowns, michelle lujan grisham, new mexico

News

Trump lawyer teases brand-new ‘shocking’ lawsuit about Georgia election

'We have got lawsuits likely to be filed in Georgia on either Monday or Tuesday,' said Jordan Sekulow.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 5:10 pm EST
Featured Image
President Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House.
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump’s case contesting the initial election results is far from over, according to a member of his legal team who teased a “shocking” new set of legal challenges will soon be filed in Georgia.

“We have got lawsuits likely to be filed in Georgia on either Monday or Tuesday,” Jordan Sekulow told Newsmax over the weekend, the Epoch Times reports. “I can’t tell you right now, but what’s coming in Georgia will be shocking, when we file this in federal court Monday or Tuesday,” he added. “It’s nothing that we have talked [about] before.”

“I will tell you, the Lt. Gov. [Geoff Duncan] in Georgia, the Secretary of State in Georgia [Brad Raffensperger] in Georgia, they’re in for quite a shock on Monday and Tuesday about how poorly...they ran the elections in one of their major counties,” Sekulow continued, adding that the new charges are “completely separate” from the cases detailed last week by attorney Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, and Sidney Powell.

At the time of publication, no new lawsuit has yet been filed in Georgia, but a full machine recount requested by the Trump campaign began Tuesday, following the completion of a by-hand audit which reduced former Vice President Joe Biden’s lead over Trump from approximately 15,000 to 12,284, falling short of the margin necessary to flip the state. That recount is not expected to significantly alter the results, mainly because it is not incorporating the more rigorous vetting practices demanded by conservatives and election-integrity activists. 

Republican Gov. Brian Kemp, facing heat for his part in approving the current rules and results so far, on Monday called on election officials to “conduct a sample audit of signatures on the absentee ballot envelopes and compare those to the signatures on applications and on file at the Secretary of State’s Office,” but state voting system manager Gabriel Sterling claimed the evidence of irregularities was not enough to warrant it.

As for that evidence, Just the News reports that Georgia rejected just 0.2% of mail-in ballots over such flaws in 2020, a rate more than 30 times lower than the rejection rate of 6.4% in 2016.  University of Florida political science Professor Daniel Smith says this is simply because the “cure rate” – contacting absentee voters to resolve discrepancies before their ballots have to be tossed – was “much higher.”

However, Breitbart’s Joel Pollak suggests the curing and rejections would still be higher if not for a consent decree the state settled with Democrats in March which, he argues, made meaningful signature matching dramatically less likely by not only requiring any election official who finds a potential mismatch to consult with two colleagues before acting (“With hundreds of thousands of absentee ballots to be counted, it is difficult to pull additional officials off their assignments to examine a signature”), then requiring all three to sign their own names to the rejected envelope (potentially subjecting themselves to retaliation for “voter suppression”).

Further, The Federalist’s John Daniel Davidson adds, “instead of having to match the signature on file with eNet, the absentee ballot signature only had to match the signature on the absentee ballot application. The key word in the settlement was ‘any.’ That is, an absentee ballot can only be rejected if it doesn’t match ‘any’ of the signatures on file—either in eNet or the signature on the absentee ballot application.”

This means that “if someone fraudulently filed an absentee ballot application, that same person could then sign the absentee ballot itself, and since the two signatures would match, the ballot would be accepted,” Davidson warns.

Most media outlets have called the presidential election for Biden, though Trump’s lawyers say they have identified more than double the number of questionable ballots necessary to prove Trump the legitimate winner. Trump would need to flip multiple states in addition to Georgia to secure a second term.


  2020 election, 2020 presidential election, donald trump, election fraud, election integrity, georgia, jordan sekulow, lawsuits, vote fraud

News

Belgian police will ‘ring the bell’ and check houses at Christmas to prevent gatherings

‘It is my absolute wish, and that of my colleagues, to allow a little more human closeness for Christmas,’ the Belgian Minister of the Interior claimed. ‘At the same time, we must take the alarm signals from hospitals very seriously.’
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 4:44 pm EST
Featured Image
Belgian police Shutterstock
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

ROESELARE, Belgium, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Belgium’s Minister of the Interior warned that police would “ensure compliance with health measures at Christmas,” knocking on doors to assess if families are breaking COVID-19 restrictions.

Speaking to Belgian weekly newspaper De Zondag, Annelies Verlinden announced that over Christmas, police will “monitor compliance with the measures.”

“Enforcement is very important,” Verlinden said. “And where necessary, due to noise nuisance for example, the police will ring the bell.”

She stopped short of ordering police to enter homes to break up parties, mentioning that “residential entry in itself is not a priority. The legislation does not make that possible either.”

Verlinden herself was invited into Belgium’s new government, and only assumed office on October 1 of this year. After 18 years as a lawyer, Verlinden was described by her interviewer as “suddenly a powerful woman, especially now that we are almost living in a police state.”

“If we all stick to the measures, we may be able to offer some perspective,” Verlinden claimed, in answer to questions about Christmas celebrations.

“It is my absolute wish, and that of my colleagues, to allow a little more human closeness for Christmas. At the same time, we must take the alarm signals from hospitals very seriously. We have to find a balance.”

Belgium is currently under another national lockdown with strict rules in place regarding social contact. The government website stipulates that close contact, i.e., contact without physical distancing, is only allowed with one and the same person.

If a person lives on his own, he can have one such close contact and an extra visitor, but not simultaneously. Outside, only groups of “up to 4 people are allowed,” providing that physical distancing is maintained.

— 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 news comes shortly after a similar announcement last month by an official in the West Midlands Police in the U.K.

David Jamieson, the politician responsible for the U.K. police force in the West Midlands area, made the comments to The Telegraph, stating, “If we think there’s large groups of people gathering where they shouldn’t be, then police will have to intervene. If, again, there’s flagrant breaking of the rules, then the police would have to enforce.”

Jamieson, the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) for West Midlands Police (WMP), oversees the department and has the power to appoint and fire the chief constable.

Since Jamieson’s comments, the U.K. government has announced an easing of the current national lockdown, with plans to allow three households to meet over the Christmas period. In place of a national lockdown, the country will return to a stricter tiered system of restrictions.

While lockdowns are being reintroduced across the globe in supposed attempts to combat the spread of COVID-19, studies are proving that such measures are ineffective. Conducted by the Heritage Foundation, a paper in July examined the United States, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Italy, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and Iran. The study found that lockdowns “are less effective at combating COVID-19 than strategies more narrowly targeted at those most in danger.”

More recently, the American Institute for Economy Research (AIER) issued a report re-affirming the findings that lockdowns cause widespread damage to normal life. The AIER showed that lockdowns significantly and detrimentally affect mental health, unemployment figures, crime rates and healthcare.


  annelies verlinden, belgium, covid-19, david jamieson, lockdowns, united kingdom

News

Feinstein resigns committee leadership after left decides she was too nice to Amy Coney Barrett

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois has already said he wants to succeed the California senator as the Dems' Judiciary Committee chair.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 4:22 pm EST
Featured Image
YouTube / screenshot
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California will not continue as ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee when the next Congress convenes in January following unrest within her party over her handling of Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearings last month.

Feinstein, who infamously faulted Barrett for the perception that the “dogma” of her Catholic faith “lives loudly within you” during the latter’s confirmation to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017, grilled her again this year over her views on abortion but was less outwardly hostile and did not renew her attacks on Barrett’s faith.

After the hearings, left-wing and pro-abortion activists attacked Feinstein for her milder approach (and particularly for the sin of hugging Republican Committee chair Sen. Lindsey Graham), with abortion lobbying group NARAL going so far as to declare the committee “needs new leadership” because Feinstein “gave credibility” to a process the abortion lobby had deemed “not legitimate.”

“After serving as the lead Democrat on the Judiciary Committee for four years, I will not seek the chairmanship or ranking member position in the next Congress,” Feinstein confirmed Monday, Politico reported. “I look forward to continuing to serve as a senior Democrat on the Judiciary, Intelligence, Appropriations and Rules committees as we work with the Biden administration.”

"This was a necessary step if Democrats are ever going to meaningfully confront the damage Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell have done to the federal judiciary," reacted Brian Fallon, executive director of the progressive lobbying group Demand Justice. "Going forward, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee must be led by someone who will not wishfully cling to a bygone era of civility and decorum that Republicans abandoned long ago."

Following the news, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, declared his intentions to succeed Feinstein, saying “we have to roll up our sleeves and get to work on undoing the damage of the last four years and protecting fundamental civil and human rights."

The general public overwhelmingly disapproved of attacks on Barrett’s faith, which a number of Democrat leaders such as Feinstein recognized as a liability, especially with the presidential election just a month away. But despite the party’s past experiences, Feinstein’s departure from the post may signal that the Democrat Party’s more strategic, establishmentarian elements have not fully wrested control from the more strident, less patient progressive faction. 

— 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

  amy coney barrett, democrats, dianne feinstein, left-wing extremism, senate, senate pro-life caucus

News

BREAKING: DC archbishop affirms he will give Holy Communion to pro-abortion Joe Biden

‘I hope it’s a real dialogue, because I think that’s the mantra of Pope Francis,’ said Archbishop Wilton Gregory about his relationship with Biden.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 4:15 pm EST
Featured Image
Archbishop Wilton Gregory Mark Wilson / Getty Images
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory of Washington, D.C., affirmed he will not deny giving Holy Communion to pro-abortion former Vice President Joe Biden, saying he hopes for a “conversational relationship.”

Speaking to Catholic News Service – which is funded by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops – Gregory, who is currently in Rome to be made a cardinal on Saturday, expressed his support for Biden’s wish to receive Holy Communion, despite being an ardent supporter of abortion. Jesuit-run America magazine reprinted the interview.

Referring to his relationship with Biden, the archbishop said, “I hope it’s a real dialogue, because I think that’s the mantra of Pope Francis — that we should be a church in dialogue, even with those with whom we have some serious disagreements.”

The archbishop noted how Biden had received Communion during his eight years as vice president under President Barack Obama, and that “I’m not going to veer from that.”

Gregory added that Catholics knew the Church’s teaching regarding the “sacredness of human life from conception to natural death.” Accordingly, he does not think that he would be giving scandal in giving Holy Communion to Biden, who denies Catholic teaching on that point.

Gregory even inferred that giving Holy Communion to Biden was part of his pastoral duty: “On my part, it’s a matter of the responsibility that I have as the archbishop to be engaged and to be in dialogue with him, even in those areas where we obviously have some differences.”

Continuing, Archbishop Gregory called for “the capacity to have civil disagreements — serious disagreements, you know, really pointed disagreements — but done in such a way that the focus is on the argument, not on the demonization of the people with whom we disagree.”

Joe Biden has been very open about his support for abortion as well as gender ideology. He recently called abortion an “essential health service” and wishes to enshrine abortion into federal law.

Biden also advocates a number of policies which would promote LGBT ideology in everyday life in America, as well as across the world.

The Catholic Church teaches that abortion is always wrong, because it kills an innocent human being, thus violating the Church’s prohibition on murder, and that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered” and “under no circumstances can they be approved” (CCC 2270-2272; CCC 2357).

After Biden was denied receiving Holy Communion by a priest last year, in accordance with canon law, he stated, “It’s not a position that I’ve found anywhere else, including from the Holy Father, who gives me Communion.”

Cardinal Raymond Burke, former Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, gave an interview in September in which he referenced Biden, saying that “a Catholic may not support abortion in any shape or form because it is one of the most grievous sins against human life, and has always been considered to be intrinsically evil.”

Cardinal Burke gave another interview just days prior to the presidential election, in which he condemned Biden’s positions on life, marriage and the family.

“I can’t imagine that he would present himself as a devout Catholic,” Burke said. “He has a record which is unfortunately perfect in promoting the attack on the innocent defense of the unborn … He is also not correct on the issues with regard to marriage and the family. The great darkness in our nation comes from the wholesale slaughter of the unborn, the attack on the family, all this gender theory … and now the attack on religious freedom.”

— 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

Archbishop Gregory has been at odds with Catholic teaching on several occasions.

Earlier this year, he claimed that a person’s “human dignity” begins at birth, instead of at conception. “Birth is only the first moment of a person’s human dignity, which is never lost throughout the journey of life,” Gregory stated in an email, according to the Associated Press.

In 2019, Gregory told a woman pretending to be a man and claiming to be a practicing Catholic that as a transgender person she belongs to the “heart” of the Church and fits right in “the family.”

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in 2015 to effectively legalize homosexual “marriage,” Gregory refrained from forcefully condemning the ruling, calling it “a decision that confers a civil entitlement to some people who could not claim it before. It does not resolve the moral debate that preceded it and will most certainly continue in its wake.”

During the COVID-19 lockdowns, Archbishop Gregory made headlines for issuing a stinging rebuke to the John Paul II National Shrine for “allow[ing]” President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump to go through with a long-planned visit the day after Trump infuriated liberals by standing outside of St. John’s Episcopal Church with a Bible. The church had been set on fire the night before. Many in the media falsely claimed that the protestors outside St. John’s had been teargassed rather than pepper sprayed to clear the way for the president.

“I find it baffling and reprehensible that any Catholic facility would allow itself to be so egregiously misused and manipulated in a fashion that violates our religious principles, which call us to defend the rights of all people even those with whom we might disagree,” said Gregory.

In 2019, however, Gregory offered a funeral Mass for the repose of the soul of pro-abortion journalist Cokie Roberts. Pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) gave a eulogy from the lectern in the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in the nation’s capital as the archbishop looked on.

In spite of these actions and positions, Pope Francis decided to make Gregory a cardinal.


  abortion, catholic, holy communion, joe biden, pope francis, wilton gregory

News

Canadian province will now pay for ‘breast reduction’ surgery for gender-confused females

One critic pointed out that Nova Scotia's taxpayer money should not go to the funding 'non-essential services' which push 'political agendas'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 4:14 pm EST
Featured Image
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

NOVA SCOTIA, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A Canadian province will now cover the cost of “breast reduction” surgery for gender-confused women.

According to a Nova Scotia Medical Services Insurance (MSI) bulletin dated November 4, the “diagnoses of Persistent and Well Documented Gender Dysphoria” has now been added “to the list of criteria for MSI coverage for a breast reduction.”

“Approved GAS applications must be on file and the request for approval must come from the NS physician who will be providing this service,” reads the bulletin.

According to a Global News report from November 10, a press release from Dalhousie Legal Aid Services claims that the Nova Scotia government was now covering breast reduction surgeries is due to a complaint filed to the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission.

The Global News report says that the Legal Aid press release states that a person who goes by the name of Sebastian Gaskarth filed the complaint after Gaskarth had surgery but was told afterward that MSI would not cover the cost.

According to the Global News report, Gaskarth said “I identify as a non-binary person, the irony of that is that I have to explain myself as what I’m not, so I’m not a man and I’m not a woman.”

“It’s one thing to grow up in a society that’s binary, but to see that this surgery is available it definitely affirms those people that don’t fit into either of those categories neatly,” Gaskarth was quoted as saying in the Global News report.

— 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 2014, the Liberal government of Nova Scotia began to pay for “sex-reassignment" surgery, however, excluded were “chest masculinization and/or chest contouring, which typically involve liposuction and implants.”

Included at the time were mastectomies, “which can be part of a transition from female to male,” claimed the health department.

In 2018, a biological male, “Serina” Slaunwhite, who now lives as a transgender “woman” launched a human rights complaint against the government of Nova Scotia’s health department for not agreeing to fund the cost of breast implants.

In 2019, Nova Scotia began to cover breast augmentation surgery for biological males who claim to be female. Before this, Nova Scotia had only been paying for breast reduction surgery for people born female but say they are male.

A spokesperson for Campaign Life Coalition Nova Scotia Ruth Robert told LifeSiteNews that taxpayer money should not go to the funding “non-essential services” which push “political agendas.”

“It's hardly shocking that the Nova Scotia government has taken this step since such surgeries are already available for transgender individuals. Taxpayer money should not go to fund non-essential services, let alone ones that seem to be pushed for political agendas and have been known to cause deep pain and regret,” Roberts said.

"It is appalling that our money would be used to fund such surgeries, simply to appease the desires of the LGBTQ+ lobby,” she continued, adding: “People are welcome to their opinions, and can lobby for what they please, but I expect my dollars to fund necessary and helpful surgeries instead of those based in ideology rather than sound practice and good scientific research.”

Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Joseph Berger told LifeSiteNews in 2017 that those who use surgery or hormone treatment to appear as a member of the opposite sex ultimately live unhappy lives.

“Medically speaking, they’re just unhappy with who they are,” Berger told LifeSiteNews.

“And no, radical surgery, trying to change the external body configuration, plus hormones, I don’t think is the ideal treatment for unhappiness.”

Last year, Nova Scotia allowed people the option to choose a gender “X” on their driver's license birth certificate, and other forms of identification.

At the time, Jack Fonseca from Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) told LifeSiteNews that the government move was “harmful” and that they were trying to “force its citizenry, en masse, to deny scientific fact and biological reality.”

In late October of this year, the controversial Canadian Bill C-6 passed second reading in the House of Commons. If it becomes law, the bill would criminalize offering help to those wanting to overcome unwanted same-sex attraction or gender confusion.

Only days after Bill C-6 passed second reading, a Vancouver Supreme Court judge signed a temporary injunction which banned surgeons to perform a planned double mastectomy on a gender-confused 17-year-old girl, after pleas from the girl's mom were heard.

CLC created a website called https://stoptheban.ca/, to “fight” the “conversion therapy ban” which features ex-homosexuals and ex-transgendered people who oppose Bill C-6.


  breast reduction, canada, gender ideology, nova scotia, transgenderism

News

Orthodox Christians for Life relaunches to ‘bring a unified Orthodox Christian voice to the pro-life movement’

The group plans to develop many sanctity of life resources that are currently lacking in the Orthodox community.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 3:34 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews.com
By LSN

RIVERSIDE, California, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Orthodox Christians for Life has been restored by new leadership, after many years of inactivity. The group was originally founded in 1986, but fell dormant in the early 2000s. Orthodox Christians for Life (“OCLife”) has now obtained 501(c)(3) nonprofit status, and will once again bring a unified Orthodox Christian voice to the pro-life movement. Emily Wilkinson is its President and Executive Director.

OCLife’s mission is “To equip the Orthodox Christian community to strengthen its commitment to the sacredness of human life from conception to death, illuminating the Church’s teaching on life issues through education and engagement.”

The initial focus of the organization will be to re-establish its parish ministry program, mobilizing lay people to serve their church and community through affiliated Orthodox Christians for Life ministries. The groups’ activities will focus on sanctity of life prayer, education, and service.

“We are very excited to begin cultivating an Orthodox pro-life ethic,” said Wilkinson. “It is the duty of the Church to care for the vulnerable, which includes women at risk for abortion and their children. Our parish ministries will collaborate with local pro-life organizations to strengthen their impact and support pregnant women.”

In order to best assist Orthodox parishes with addressing life issues, especially abortion, OCLife will be surveying clergy about their pastoral needs. In the long term, OCLife plans to develop many sanctity of life resources that are currently lacking in the Orthodox community.

More information can be found on the Orthodox Christians for Life website and Facebook page. Those interested in starting a parish ministry should contact [email protected] for more information.

— 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

  abortion, oclife, orthodox christians, orthodox christians for life

News

Masks don’t stop COVID-19 spread, peer-reviewed study finds

The Danish randomized controlled trial was the first in the world to test for the efficacy of face masks to prevent wearers from contracting the coronavirus. 
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 3:32 pm EST
Featured Image
SHUTTERSTOCK
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A major study published by the Annals of Internal Medicine last week found no statistically significant difference in COVID-19 cases between mask-wearers and non-mask-wearers. 

The Danish randomized controlled trial was the first in the world to test for the efficacy of face masks to prevent wearers from contracting the coronavirus. 

1.8% of those who were asked to wear masks were infected with the virus according to antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis, while 2.1% of the control group tested positive.

4,862 Danes spent “more than 3 hours per day outside the home” every day for a month to successfully complete the trial. 

Authors of the study deemed the 0.3% discrepancy “not statistically significant.” 

— 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

Lead researcher on the study Thomas Lars Benfield lamented the rejection of the study by the Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the American Medical Association’s journal JAMA because, according to Danish Newspaper Berlingske, the results were not politically correct. 

Asked when the study, which was ready for publication a month ago, would be published, Benfield responded: “As soon as a journal is brave enough.” 

Dr. Christine Laine is the editor-in-chief of Annals of Internal Medicine. She chose to take the study on because it was “the only randomized control trial of masks for SARS-CoV-2 infection that has been done to date” and answered the specific question of whether or not masks protect wearers in areas with low infection rates and high levels of physical distancing. 

As the study was published, Pennsylvania imposed new COVID-19 restrictions, which included a mandate that masks be worn at home if someone from outside the household enters, even if physical distance can be maintained. 

Joe Biden is supportive of a national mask mandate, encouraging all Americans to wear masks outside. 

“You know, every major individual of any consequence in the health field is saying, ‘We can save 100,000 lives just between now and January 21 by wearing these masks,’” Biden said during a speech in Wilmington, Delaware.

While the Danish study is the first of its kind, further evidence against mandating masks continues to mount. 

The New England Journal of Medicine editorial on the topic of mask use versus COVID-19 assesses the matter as follows:

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.  Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes).  The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.  In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

A rapid review from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health also found statistical insignificance in its modelling when deciding how to advise the Norwegian government on its COVID-19 response:

Given the low prevalence of COVID-19 currently, even if facemasks are assumed to be effective, the difference in infection rates between using facemasks and not using facemasks would be small. Assuming that 20% of people infectious with SARS-CoV-2 do not have symptoms, and assuming a risk reduction of 40% for wearing facemask, 200 000 people would need to wear facemasks to prevent one new infection per week in the current epidemiological situation.

Then of course there is the most common-sense argument: that the SARS Cov-2 virus is between 0.06 – 0.14 microns in diameter, while the pores on the best surgical masks cannot filter out particles smaller than 0.3 microns in diameter. 

As Minnesota State Senator and Professor of Medicine Dr. Scott Jensen said in a recent interview, wearing a mask is “like putting up a chain-link fence and expecting it to keep gnats out.” 


  coronavirus restrictions, masks

News

Trump legal advisor announces new election fraud litigation in Georgia

‘It’s nothing we have talked about before, it’s not related to what you heard in the press conference either, this is something completely separate,’ said Jordan Sekulow.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 3:28 pm EST
Featured Image
Jordan Sekulow Newsmax
Charles Robertson
By

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Jordan Sekulow, one of President Trump’s legal advisors and son of Trump’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow, told Newsmax on Saturday that the Trump team has new litigation that has not yet been discussed coming early this week in Georgia

“I can’t tell you right now, but what’s coming in Georgia will be shocking when we file this in Federal Court Monday or Tuesday,” he said. “It’s nothing we have talked about before, it’s not related to what you heard in the press conference either, this is something completely separate, but I will tell you we have new litigation coming in the state of Georgia.”

He said the litigation will be based on the constitutional principle of equal protection, and the lawyers hope that it will be able to make its way to the Supreme Court.

“The lieutenant governor in Georgia, the secretary of state in Georgia, they’re in for quite a shock on Monday and Tuesday about how poorly run and they ran, and there’s gonna be a proof of how poorly run they ran the elections in one of their major counties. That is coming on either Monday or Tuesday,” he said.

Apart from this new litigation, he said that they would ask for another recount in Georgia, saying that the recent recount “was not really a recount at all, all we did was find more votes that were new votes, not recounted votes.”

The Trump campaign did request this recount on Saturday, and it is now underway. The Associated Press reports that each county must notify the public when they will be doing their recount so that monitors can be present to witness it.

Although Sekulow said that the Trump team wanted to see a proper recount in which signatures on absentee ballots are matched to the signatures on voter registrations, Voting Systems Manager for the Georgia Secretary of State’s office Gabriel Sterling said there had been no specific claims that the signature matching had not been done properly.

In Pennsylvania, meanwhile, the next step of litigation in Pennsylvania mentioned by Sekulow will be to refer the existing stay on counting late ballots to the whole Supreme Court. On November 6, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito signed an order that late ballots were to be separated and counted separately in that State.

— 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

Sekulow also mentioned upcoming litigation in Nevada concerning 160,000 ballots that were discounted for local Clark County candidates on account of suspected fraud, but were nevertheless included in the tallies for the presidential race. He said the team is considering right now whether this will be amended to an existing case or will be a new filing.

He said that they plan to file litigation in Wisconsin as well, but provided no further details.

He also clarified that his legal team represents the President himself and is investigating avenues pertaining to violations of the Constitution, whereas the Trump campaign legal team led by Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis is investigating voter fraud.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.

RELATED

Trump blasts Georgia leaders for certifying election without closer look at funny ballots

BREAKING: US Supreme Court orders Pennsylvania to segregate mail-in ballots received after 8 pm on Election Day


  2020 election, donald trump, election fraud, jordan sekulow, voter fraud

News

Fifth Circuit court upholds states’ right to block Planned Parenthood from Medicaid

Texas AG Ken Paxton and Center for Medical Progress founder David Daleiden praised the ruling, which 'make(s) clear that a state agency may determine that a Medicaid provider is unqualified.'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 3:09 pm EST
Featured Image
American Life League
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

NEW ORLEANS, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a victory for pro-life taxpayers across the country, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday that Texas and Louisiana were within their lawful powers to deny Medicaid dollars to Planned Parenthood.

Writing for the majority, Judge Priscilla Owen ruled that while the law “unambiguously provides that a Medicaid beneficiary has the right to obtain services from the qualified provider of her choice,” it “does not unambiguously say that a beneficiary may contest or otherwise challenge a determination that the provider of her choice is unqualified.” Instead, the law “make(s) clear that a state agency may determine that a Medicaid provider is unqualified and terminate its Medicaid provider agreement even if the provider is lawfully permitted to provide health services to the general public.”

The Associated Press noted that the ruling reverses a prior decision by a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit. The full court deadlocked on the matter in 2017, but since then it has been joined by six appointees of President Donald Trump, four of whom participated in the current case.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the ruling in a statement, noting one of the key reasons why the state determined Planned Parenthood was ineligible.

“Undercover video plainly showed Planned Parenthood admitting to morally bankrupt and unlawful conduct, including violations of federal law by manipulating the timing and methods of abortions to obtain fetal tissue for their own research,” Paxton said. “Planned Parenthood is not a ‘qualified’ provider under the Medicaid Act, and it should not receive public funding through the Medicaid program.”    

"The State of Texas cited the violations in Planned Parenthood's fetal 'research' programs, documented by (the Center for Medical Progress’) undercover videos, as the basis for terminating the Planned Parenthood network from taxpayer subsidies under Medicaid,” added CMP founder and lead David Daleiden. “The full federal Fifth Circuit's decision this week confirms that our undercover footage is accurate and reliable evidence of serious criminality in the abortion industry and fetal trafficking enterprises, and it affirms the broad authority that state and federal administrators have to defund entities like Planned Parenthood for illegally selling the body parts of aborted infants. 

“The Fifth Circuit has marked a clear path for the federal Health and Human Services Department to eliminate all taxpayer subsidies from the big abortion industry,” Daleiden said, “and for the U.S. Department of Justice to finally enforce the law against anyone involved in commodifying children in the womb."

In October, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider a similar case out of South Carolina, though pro-lifers hope and expect the court to be more receptive with the subsequent addition of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a pro-life originalist.

— 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

  defund planned parenthood, fifth circuit court of appeals, louisiana, medicaid, planned parenthood, priscilla owen, taxpayer funding of abortion, texas

News

Catholic psychiatrist Spaemann: Pope’s homosexual civil union remarks were ‘pandering’ to zeitgeist

German professor Christian Spaemann said he was ‘speechless to hear such a thing from the Pope's mouth’
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 2:48 pm EST
Featured Image
Pope Francis meets Yayo Grassi, left, and his homosexual partner, Iwan, at the Apostolic Nunciature on Sept. 23, 2015. Marisa Marchitelli
LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In light of the recent remarks by Pope Francis in support of same-sex civil unions, LifeSite reached out to Dr. Christian Spaemann, a Catholic psychiatrist who works in Austria and the son of famous Catholic philosopher (now deceased), Professor Robert Spaemann. We asked Dr. Spaemann, an expert on the topic of homosexuality, to comment on these papal remarks, the effects on homosexuals, and on the Catholic Church and society at large. 

LifeSite: What was your reaction to the news about the documentary film in which the Pope proposes civil unions for homosexual couples?

Professor Robert Spaemann: At first I was a little speechless to hear such a thing from the Pope's mouth. A civil union especially for homosexuals is nothing new. I reject this concept. In principle, sexuality as such is a private matter. Sexuality is a matter for the state only when it relates to the public interest, e.g. when it comes to protection against abuse or about the growing up of children under optimal conditions. The “gold standard” for this is, and this has been proven in countless studies, the natural, biological family in the context of a marriage for life between a man and a woman. For the sake of its own continued existence, a society should have enormous interest in the promotion of this family structure. The demand for a civil union or “marriage” for people who have a homosexual inclination is usually part of a cultural Marxist agenda, which wishes to dissolve all substantial differences between people and human bonds as an expression of discrimination, whatever the cost. It surprises me when representatives of the Catholic Church give their voice for such matters. They should know that such statements are always primarily seen as a consent to the present expanding diversity agenda. This smells more like pandering to the spirit of the times, rather than a true concern for the people concerned.

Some say that the pope would still be against same-sex marriage, and therefore his words would not change the teaching of the Church.

The teaching of the Church cannot be changed anyway, no matter what was meant with these words. That the reigning pope is neither for a social or ecclesiastical-sacramental equalization of homosexual relationships with marriage between man and woman seems undisputed to me. It is about something
else.

What is it about?

The Church teaches that the union between man and woman, which is based on a yes that is valid for life and which is fertile is the only for of a sexual union which corresponds with the dignity of man - in relation to his body, his soul, and his spiritual dimension – and in which the meaning of sexuality can unfold.  For this there is only one alternative, and that is sexual abstinence. In this respect, all other sexual acts violate in one way or another against the dignity of the human being and are objectively sinful. Under the influence of a moral theology that is heretical and that has been repeatedly condemned by popes like Paul VI or John Paul II and others, today representatives of the Church present the Commandments of God regarding sexuality in an abstract way as a sort of “ideal,” and sexual acts outside marriage are being justified on the basis of subjective intentions, yes even seen in a positive light. Accordingly, one thinks that one can soften the Catholic sacramental order. These representatives of the Church follow here in a tragic way an anti-Christian, gnostic concept of self-exaltation of man over his creaturely, body-soul constitution.

Exactly this view is regarded by many as hard-hearted and as unrealistic in light of the complexity of the life of many Catholics.

Concerning the complexity of life, I like to refer to a statement of the old Konrad Adenauer: “If you only look at the surface of things they are not easy, but if you look into the depths, you see the reality, and that is always easy.” Through the affirmation of various sexual behaviors, the reasonableness and clarity of the Christian faith is being diluted. The Church thereby loses her radiance and becomes superfluous in modern society, except for the icing on the cake of religious ceremonies. If we Christians do not strive to help the injured person by example and by proclaiming the healing image of sexual purity, then we are hard-hearted. Actually, we then betray Christ Himself, Whom we meet in our neighbor. Of course, the proclamation in these areas must be without condemnation, with sensitivity, understanding, patience and humility. But this seems to me to have long since become a matter of course. Loudly recited accusations of Phariseeism and a lack of mercy addressed to those who insist on representing the Catholic moral doctrine seem to me but rather to come from the moth box of “agitation and propaganda.” Such an agitation causes confusion among the faithful and instrumentalizes their trust in the teaching authority of the Church for one's own intentions. It is a kind of trick to not having to provide the explanations for the questions they themselves have raised.

Where do you see the most need for an explanation?

There is a need for explanation on many levels. I would like to present here a very clear and lively aspect. According to the universal teaching of the Old and of the New Testament and the Church Fathers, divine wisdom is inscribed in the created things. They carry, as it were, the watermark of God within them. This applies in a special way to humans. Paul speaks of the body as a temple of God that does not belong to us (1 Cor 1:19). The bodily dimension of man is it, which also is called to holiness and to eternal life (Phil 3:21). Dignitaries of the Church, who think that homosexual actions are not sinful under certain circumstances and that homosexual couples can receive a church blessing for their partnership without any vow to abstinence raise should explain to believers the meaning and significance of homosexual acts and explain how these actions can be at all performed physically so that they can be pleasing to God. I would be interested in their response. Not those who adhere to Catholic doctrine, but those who quite obviously claim something that is contrary to the previous teaching of the Church have an obligation to deliver. That we hear barely anything on the part of the church hierarchy is of course a big scandal. There is talk of new “findings in human sciences,” whereby one never learns what findings are actually involved. I, as one who knows the data of human sciences on homosexuality quite well, would also not know which “findings” one could mention here.

Do you see here a connection to the abuse scandals in Catholic Church? 

This connection exists quite obviously. One is currently trying, by implementing the normalization of homosexuality as a way of life within the Church and by consistently concealing facts, to cover up the fact that the Church has a massive problem with homosexuality. 80 percent of the cases of abuse in the Catholic Church were of a homosexual nature. The connection between homosexuality, clerical network building, ephebophilia and pedophilia becomes systematically swept under the carpet. The temptation to get out of this situation by adapting to the spirit of the times is of course great for many representatives of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. After all, there is almost no media pressure on the Church to face this problem. On the contrary, there is rather the fear to be accused by the media of being homophobic should one start to deal with the whole catastrophe.

What will be the consequences of the Pope's statements for the Church and for believers with homosexual inclinations?

The statements of the Pope concerning a civil union for homosexuals refer to the secular realm and already there highly problematic. In the larger context, they represent a fatal and more complex building block in the weakening of church teaching and in the promotion of the spread of illegal liturgical practices, which have not been challenged with the help of disciplinary measures for a long time. Mention must also be made here of the numerous appointments of bishops and cardinals, which promote the intrusion of the secular diversity ideology into the Church. The faithful and the whole world are being deprived of the possibility to receive an essential orientation about the meaning of human sexuality. From those homosexual believers who strive for an abstinent life, the church support and the backing of the hierarchy is gradually being withdrawn. There are among these Christians ecumenical networks, which in an admirable way support each other. They are marginalized and ostracized. With their experience, their knowledge, and their spirituality, they are the real pioneers and guide for the positioning of the Church in today's society.

What would be a good reaction of the Church to the situation with homosexuals today?

Of course, church teaching and discipline must be fully restored, liturgical, partly sacrilegious practices ended and many seminaries completely reorganized. In essence, however, it is about the fact that the Church again concentrates on the mystery that she herself is. That she learns to withdraw from the Gnostic subjectivism of the world, that she once again radically turns to Christ and in Him to the mystery of the Trinity, creation and redemption, thereby calming down. Only in this peace the Church can be fruitful. Only in this way can we Christians again be servants of peace, of freedom and a joy for the people.


  catholic, christian spaemann, gay civil unions, homosexuality, pope francis

News

Operation Warp Speed chief: Millions could receive coronavirus vaccine by the end of the year

Dr. Moncef Slaoui gave his message in a number of TV interviews on Sunday morning, saying to ABC News that as part of Operation Warp Speed, 'we are ready to start shipping vaccines within 24 hours from approval.'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 2:44 pm EST
Featured Image
Dr. Moncef Slaoui
Michael Haynes Michael Haynes Follow
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Chief Scientific Advisor of Trump’s Operation Warp Speed vaccine plan has urged trust in the vaccine, saying that approved vaccines could be issued even in mid-December, with an initial 20 million vaccinated even before the end of the year.

Dr. Moncef Slaoui gave his message in a number of TV interviews on Sunday morning, saying to ABC News that as part of Operation Warp Speed, “we are ready to start shipping vaccines within 24 hours from approval.”

This turnaround would result in people potentially being “immunized…within 48 hours from the approval.” With this swift rollout of vaccines, MedScape reports that up to “20 million” people could be given vaccines before the end of December, with a further 30 million people vaccinated each successive month.

As to the possible date for the arrival of the first vaccine, the Food and Drug Administration is meeting on December 10 to discuss approving the Pfizer vaccine, with vaccines possibly being given out as early as December 11.

Pfizer recently announced its pilot program in four American states in order to “refine the plan for the delivery and deployment” of the COVID-19 vaccine that the company is developing. President Donald Trump has even mentioned that the U.S. military would help to distribute a vaccine.

— 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 all his interviews, Slaoui dealt with questions regarding the safety of the vaccine, claiming that “this vaccine will be as safe as all the other vaccines that are being used in the population.”

However, he also re-iterated that he was completely unable to give any idea of the long-term safety: “what we are lacking is the long-term safety, just because it’s a fact; we can’t follow up for too long on these vaccines while one to two thousand people die every day.”

Despite Slaoui’s television testimony regarding the safety of the two proposed vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, reports are emerging that the Pfizer vaccine is in fact having “severe” side effects upon this involved in the trials. Pfizer’s claim that the vaccine is over 90% effective, was also not substantiated through a peer review, but simply announced in a press release

Pfizer’s statement mentioned 43,538 participants in its trials, but only 94 of those were confirmed as having COVID-19. LifeSiteNews has previously noted that as only 94 participants tested positive, it also appears difficult to generalize the vaccine is “more than 90% effective,” since some people might have been exposed to the virus more frequently, or for a longer time.

Continuing, Slaoui commented on reluctance to take such a vaccine: “I’m very, very concerned about the hesitancy [to receive a vaccine] as it exists, and I think it's very unfortunate because this has been exacerbated by the political context under which we have worked very hard…to make these vaccines available.”

“The vaccines have been developed as thoroughly and as scientifically as ever,” he added. 

Slaoui attempted to persuade people to take the vaccine, despite the lack of evidence regarding potential long-term health impacts: “I would really urge people to listen to the experts, look at the data, keep their mind open, and hopefully accept to be immunized.”

One such expert is Dr. Michael Yeadon, the former Vice President and Chief Scientist of Pfizer. In recent writings and interviews, Yeadon slated the widespread push for universal vaccination, calling it “unnecessary.” 

“There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. I’ve never heard such nonsense talked about vaccines,” Yeadon said. “You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects.”

Interestingly, the public trust of the produced vaccineshas actually fallen dramatically over the course of the year. Whilst in January, 69% of people surveyed were comfortable with a vaccine, in October that number was only 47%.

The figure is mirrored in a Gallup Poll, which found that 42% of people would reject a coronavirus vaccine. 

Dr. Helen Watt of the Anscombe Bioethics Centre in Oxford, England, told the Catholic Herald that the Pfizer vaccine “makes no use of a foetal cell-line in the production process itself, and no use in the design,” but that “[o]ne of the confirmatory lab tests on the vaccine did sadly involve an old foetal cell-line.” The Children of God for Life organization says that the Pfizer vaccine is tested using the HEK 293 cell line, which is derived from kidney tissue taken from a healthy baby who was aborted in the Netherlands in the 1970s.

Children of God for Life also says that the Moderna vaccine has been tested on a cell line of an aborted child.

RELATED:

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’

Cdl. Burke: Forced vaccines violate ‘integrity of citizens’

No, a COVID-19 vaccine is not necessary to return life to normal

Why rushing a COVID vaccine will likely fail to provide a safe and effective immunity

‘Mandatory vaccination is madness’: American doctor

PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus

9,000 medical professionals criticize lockdowns, argue for ‘focused protection’ and return to normal life

US bishop rebukes priest over homily warning against coronavirus vaccine

Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’


  coronavirus vaccine, moderna, moncef slaoui, operation warp speed, pfizer

News

Qantas Airlines CEO: Proof of coronavirus vaccine will be required of all international passengers

'We are looking at changing our terms and conditions to say, for international travelers that we will ask people to have a vaccination before they can get on the aircraft.'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 2:37 pm EST
Featured Image
Qantas CEO Alan Joyce Twitter video / screenshot
Patrick Delaney Patrick Delaney Follow
By

SYDNEY, Australia, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Alan Joyce, the openly homosexual CEO of Qantas, Australia’s largest airline, has publicly confirmed that his nation’s flag carrier will require proof of COVID-19 vaccination for all international passengers.

Appearing as a guest on the Australian television program A Current Affair, Joyce was asked by hostess Tracy Grimshaw, “Alan, when there is a vaccine, are you going to require all of your passengers to be vaccinated before they get on a plane?”

Joyce responded, “Yeah, we are looking at changing our terms and conditions to say, for international travelers that we will ask people to have a vaccination before they can get on the aircraft. Whether you need that domestically, we’ll have to see what happens with COVID-19 and the market, but certainly for international visitors coming out and people leaving the country, we think that’s a necessity.”

Joyce indicated that such a requirement is likely to become an industry standard. “I think that’s going to be a common thing, talking to my colleagues in other airlines around the globe,” he said.

Harsh responses to this announcement came swiftly. As reported by Lauren McMah of news.com.au, these included “calls to boycott Qantas.”

“His comments sparked an immediate wave of fury from people who objected to the policy,” she wrote. A number of Twitter users angrily weighed in.

This announcement comes while there is an international struggle between a push for vaccine mandates on one side, and resistance for such invasive measures emerging in response.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated in August that he expects a COVID-19 vaccine will be “as mandatory as you can possibly make it.” Following a significant and immediate backlash, he walked back his comments saying there will be “no compulsory vaccine but there will be a lot of encouragement and measures to get as high a rate of acceptance as usual.”

In September LifeSiteNews drew attention to the fact that the state of Western Australia passed a law that allows police officers or other “authorized officers” to “restrain individuals and, if deemed necessary, forcibly remove their underwear in order to administer a vaccine.”

However, an attempted clarification offered that “[t]hese powers are only enforceable under a public health state of emergency, as was declared in Western Australia on 23 March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.” 

“The government should have declared the emergency over months ago,” Dr. Rocco Loiacono, senior lecturer at the Curtin Law School in Western Australia, told LifeSiteNews at the time, “but of course they will not now relinquish these newfound powers.”

Originally an Irish national, Joyce also affirmed interest in establishing “an electronic version” of “a vaccination passport” to be required for all international travelers.

Joyce and his longtime “partner,” Shane Lloyd, live in an inner-city suburb of Sydney.

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

RELATED:

Cdl. Burke: Forced vaccines violate ‘integrity of citizens’

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’

Australian Prime Minister: COVID vaccine will be ‘as mandatory as you can possibly make it’

Australian state law empowers officials to forcibly remove underwear to administer vaccine

‘Mandatory vaccination is madness’: American doctor


  alan joyce, australia, coronavirus, coronavirus vaccine, qantas, vaccines

News

Maryland gov. sends ‘compliance units’ to enforce COVID limits on churches, businesses

Last week, Republican Gov. Larry Hogan imposed 50% capacity limits on religious, retail, and dining establishments, a 10 PM curfew on the sale of alcohol, and other restrictions.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 2:23 pm EST
Featured Image
Governor of Maryland website
Calvin Freiburger Calvin Freiburger Follow Calvin
By Calvin Freiburger

ANNAPOLIS, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Maryland’s Republican Gov. Larry Hogan is under fire for his latest COVID-19 action, the announcement of “compliance units” to enforce his restrictions on retail and restaurants.

Last week, Hogan imposed 50% capacity limits on religious, retail, and dining establishments, a 10 PM curfew on the sale of alcohol, and other restrictions in the name of combatting COVID-19. On Monday, he announced that “High Visibility Compliance Units” were being dispatched across the state ahead of the Thanksgiving holiday, to focus on bars, restaurants, and other “venues that host gatherings, including nightclubs and banquet halls.”

“I know that there is growing frustration that we are all still fighting this virus,” Hogan said. “Many people are struggling emotionally and financially, and this is causing a great deal of stress for nearly everyone — but following the public health directives is the only way we will be able to stop this virus, keep Maryland open for business, and keep hospitals from overflowing.”

The governor’s office is also encouraging Marylanders to report one another by phone for “unsafe facilities and activities or public health order violations.”

During public remarks on the measures, Hogan also declared “there’s no constitutional right to walk around without a mask,” CBS Baltimore reports. “It’s sort of like saying I have a constitutional right to drive drunk. I have a constitutional right to not wear a seat belt, or to yell fire in a crowded movie theater, or to not follow the speed limit.” Some took issue with Hogan’s analogy:

There remains significant scientific disagreement over the effectiveness of masks against COVID-19, and while the federal and state constitutions do not directly address mask mandates, it is also a tenet of constitutional interpretation that, as the Ninth Amendment says, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Maryland Republican Del. Dan Cox, who has proposed legislation limiting the governor’s authority and unsuccessfully taken Hogan to court over his emergency actions, said Tuesday he will be filing articles of impeachment against Hogan for “sending troopers to arrest Thanksgiving Turkey feasters.”

— 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 American Civil Rights Union also noted Monday the hypocrisy of state health officials issuing a citation to Community United Methodist Church shortly after Hogan ordered early release for certain nonviolent criminals due to COVID-19.

“I was in my office alone, without a mask on, and heard someone at the locked door of the church,” Rev. Dennis Jackman MD says. “I was not expecting anyone, so I went to see who was trying to get in the church. Immediately after answering the door, I went to my desk and put on my mask, but the health official seemed intent on finding something worthy of a citation.”

“The entire country is watching this juxtaposition of principles and priorities,” warned American Constitutional Rights Union President Lori Roman. “A virus cannot erase our freedoms.”


  churches, compliance units, coronavirus, covid-19, dan cox, larry hogan, lockdowns, maryland, public health, republicans

News

British governments may ‘allow’ UK residents a Christmas break from lockdown

According to the UK’s Daily Telegraph, the United Kingdom’s Westminster government is working with the governments of devolved regions of the country to create one set of eased Covid lockdown regulations for Christmas.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 1:50 pm EST
Featured Image
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson WPA Pool / Pool / Getty
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

UNITED KINGDOM, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Residents of the United Kingdom may have some of their civil rights returned to them for a few days around Christmas.

According to the UK’s Daily Telegraph, the United Kingdom’s Westminster government is working with the governments of devolved regions of the country to create one set of eased Covid lockdown regulations for Christmas. The goal is to “allow” different households in the United Kingdom to create temporary “extended bubbles.” This will permit relations to visit together for an abridged festive season. The governments want a common plan, so that families can travel from one part of the country to the other.

Currently households are not allowed to visit each other's homes. 

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has revealed that churches offering Christmas Eve services, including Midnight Mass, will be open to worshippers across the United Kingdom. Choirs will be allowed to sing, but congregations are asked to remain silent.

The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, has announced that the temporary easement will not extend to Hogmanay, i.e., New Year’s Eve, and New Year’s Day, Scotland’s most important festival. Hitherto Scotland’s New Year has been welcomed in by large parties and lavish public celebrations. January 2 is also a public holiday in Scotland. 

Sturgeon cited the importance of Christmas to children as her reason for choosing the Christian feast over the national holiday. 

“Christmas is a more important time for kids,” Sturgeon stated, but added: “Christmas is likely to be when families don’t want to leave someone on their own.” 

The easement plans are not, however, set in stone. The First Minister hinted that the freedom of families to travel and assemble depends on the rate of infection in December.

“Reducing the prevalence of the virus is also what would allow us to consider a slight and careful […] easing of the rules for a few days over the festive period,” she said. 

Currently church services are closed to worshippers in England, which is under a strict lockdown until December 2.  Churches are open to a limited number of worshippers per service in Wales, with the understanding that they ought not to travel to England. Churches are also open in Scotland to a limited number of worshippers, with an understanding that people from the most restricted, “Level 4”, areas may not leave them to attend their regular place of worship. Currently people in Northern Ireland may go to church, but as of November 27, the churches will be closed to congregations for two weeks. 

— 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

But what about Advent?

Archbishop Eamon Martin, the Primate of All-Ireland, voiced his disappointment that Northern Ireland has decided to close church services to worshippers for the first weeks of Advent.

“The unexpected news announced late last night that churches across Northern Ireland are to close for two weeks from November 27 has come as a great disappointment, and is contrary to the assurances given to faith groups at a meeting just last week at which we were praised for our attention to safety and public health,” Martin said last Friday.

 “Our parishes have consistently tried to support the Executive and public health authorities and we will do so again, but we would prefer to do so in mature partnership and dialogue,” the Archbishop continued.

Martin asked that the “ban on public worship will be for the shortest period possible” and sought clarification that churches will still be open for private prayer.

“This issue was the subject of debate during the first lockdown and we were confident that it was understood that churches are places of sanctuary, calm, and spiritual strength during this crisis,” the Irish Primate reminded the public. 

“I cannot understand how a person may still go to an off-licence to buy alcohol but might not be permitted to visit and sit in quiet solitary prayer in a large church. The right to do this is particularly important for Catholics.”

Martin stressed that these restrictions will blight “the beginning of the holy season of Advent” which he explained was “a sacred time of preparation for Christmas.

“In speaking about ‘saving Christmas’, I urge the [Northern Irish] Executive to accept that for many people a ‘meaningful Christmas’ is about more than shopping, eating and drinking,” he added. 

“Spiritual preparation is essential,” he said.

Although England will get a breath of relative freedom on December 2—and the public will be allowed to return to church services—some areas will find themselves more hampered by coronavirus-inspired restrictions. On December 2, England will adopt a regional “tier system” resembling the one currently imposed upon the Scots by their Holyrood government. However, “non-essential retail” will be permitted in all three of England’s tiers, allowing Christmas shopping and Boxing Day sales.

The lockdowns are expected to last until the end of March.

Daily Telegraph columnist Ross Clark objected to the tier system, calling it “a rebadged lockdown.”

“While it will be described as a return to tiers, those tiers will be made tougher and more of us will find ourselves shunted into the top [more restrictive] tiers,” Clark stated.

“The result is that most people will be forbidden from mixing with family and friends until Easter – save for a brief truce over Christmas.”

The slight relaxation of social rules over Christmas, Clark intimated, is a bribe.

“A semi-free Christmas is being used as the thin, dangling carrot which is supposedly going to help us resign ourselves to many months of isolation,” he wrote. 


  boris johnson, christmas, coronavirus restrictions, eamon martin, uk

News

Priest accuses Detroit bishop of ‘cover-up’ of gay grooming by Archdiocesan employee

'What we have here is nothing less than the selective and arbitrary enforcement of the Archdiocese’s policies against sexual harassment and abuse, a cover up of sodomitical vice being perpetrated by an Archbishop’s favorite, and the removal of a whistleblower pastor'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:59 pm EST
Featured Image
Father Michael Suhy Family photo
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy
By Dorothy Cummings McLean

PLYMOUTH, MI, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A priest removed from his parish says he is being punished for speaking out against a “prominent” diocesan employee who sexually harassed a young man.

Fr Michael Suhy, 46, of the Archdiocese of Detroit was removed as pastor of Our Lady of Good Counsel in Plymouth, MI on November 17. A letter written to the parish by Auxiliary Bishop Gerard Battersby stated that Suhy had “become overwhelmed with the responsibilities, burdens, and challenges of administrating” the large parish. But Suhy believes he was removed for objecting to the continued employment by the Archdiocese of an active homosexual who counselled a young parishioner to engage in immorality.

In a statement dated November 20, 2020, Suhy revealed that a year ago the young man’s parents sent him a copy of a letter addressed to Archbishop Allen Vigneron. In the letter, the parents complained that a “prominent employee” of the Archdiocese of Detroit had been sexually harassing and “grooming” their son. Suhy stated that Vigneron had asked him to meet with the parents, and he sat down with them twice.

“From the parents, I learned that their son was told by the archdiocesan employee the following: that he was a homosexual; that he was living in a long-term homosexual relationship; that the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality was wrong; that it was not a grave sin to engage in sodomy; and that his male lover knew that he was sleeping with other men and didn't have an issue with it. The archdiocesan employee offered advice and encouragement to the young man on how to be a sexually active homosexual,” he wrote.

"Worst of all, perhaps, was the report that Archbishop H. Vigneron himself knew about his prominent subordinate’s homosexual relationship – and that he was accepting of it.”

Later, Suhy was told by a fellow priest that he had reason for concern that the prominent lay employee was behaving inappropriately towards young priests.

Suhy said in his statement that the matter amounted to a “cover-up” and the removal of a “whistleblower.”

“What we have here is nothing less than the selective and arbitrary enforcement of the Archdiocese’s policies against sexual harassment and abuse, a cover up of sodomitical vice being perpetrated by an Archbishop’s favorite, and the removal of a whistleblower pastor.”

— 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

Although the Archdiocese of Detroit investigated the complaints, the prominent employee was not removed. Suhy was told by the Director of Human Resources that “nothing could be done.” As a result, Suhy became “very upset” and expressed his opinions “vociferously, as any concerned pastor of souls would.”

LifeSiteNews has learned that Suhy repeatedly objected to the cover-up he saw being perpetuated by the Archdiocese of Detroit. After the Archdiocese failed to take appropriate action, Suhy went to multiple superiors. Unfortunately, they said they knew nothing of the matter. LifeSiteNews has also been told that the Archdiocese’s purported “process” against Suhy did not begin until after he began to complain about the purported cover-up.

LifeSiteNews has contacted the Archdiocese of Detroit for comment but has not received a reply.

Suhy has now been removed from his parish, but the subject of the misconduct investigation is still employed by the Archdiocese.

“As of this day, he continues to cohabit in his home with his male lover as a matter of public record,” the priest stated.

The “prominent” archdiocesan employee, reportedly a “favorite” of Archbishop Vigneron, is thus still in violation of the Archdiocese of Detroit’s Pastoral and Employee Code of Conduct.

The Code states that “Clergy, religious, staff and volunteers who are committed to a celibate lifestyle are called to be an example of celibate chastity in all relationships at all times” (4.1). This, then, precludes even lay employees from giving scandal by living openly with a lover and engaging in polyamory.

The Code also affirms: “Clergy, staff and volunteers must not engage in physical, psychological, written or verbal harassment of staff, volunteers or parishioners and must not tolerate such harassment by other Church staff or volunteers” (5). This includes “unwelcome sexual advances” and “sexual comments or sexual jokes” (5.2).

LifeSiteNews has learned Suhy had also hurt a few feelings, during his time at Our Lady of Good Counsel, by reintroducing traditional forms of worship to the parish. He was formerly a Benedict monk of Norcia.

Diane Korzeniewski, a former parishioner of Fr Suhy, gave a glowing testimony over social media about the priest.

“Fr. Suhy loves being a shepherd of souls and he’s very good at it," Korzeniewski wrote on a Suhy’s prayer group Facebook page.

“He knows the faith, he teaches it with love and passion, and he is more than competent to handle a parish plus school," she continued.

“I knew that statement by Bishop Battersby was cover for something else. I’ve seen too many priests side-lined under highly suspect excuses in this diocese, including my own pastor, Fr. Perrone. Fr. Suhy, by following his conscience, is one of many now lancing the boil in Archdiocese of Detroit.”

Roland Tuquero wrote, “Fr. Suhy is one of the most holy men I know and has a childlike quality and love of Christ."

“Fr. Suhy has been nothing but pure virtue. He enabled parking lot masses and confessions during this pandemic when no other parish in the AOD offered this.”

The Archdiocese of Detroit’s refusal to dismiss its employee is in contrast to how it handled the case of 59-year-old Terri Gonda, former music director of St. John Fisher Parish in Detroit. Gonda was dismissed from her post by the Archdiocese this June after she contracted a civil “marriage” with another woman.

Fr. Suhy is to be replaced by an elderly monsignor, Msgr. Patrick Halfpenny, who was the vice-rector and dean of seminary formation at Sacred Heart Major Seminary when Archbishop Vigneron was its Rector.


  allen vigneron, archdiocese of detroit, catholic, coverup, gerard battersby, grooming, homosexuality, michael suhy

News

Dem ex-congressman: People should receive vaccine to qualify for next corona stimulus

Former Democratic presidential hopeful Rep. John Delaney suggested the government pay people $1,500 to receive a coronavirus vaccine.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:35 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
Mary Werbaneth
By

November 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews Democrat John Delaney, former 2020 presidential candidate and United States Representative for Maryland’s 6th congressional district from 2013-2019, recently suggested that future coronavirus relief checks to Americans be conditioned on them receiving a vaccine. 

Delaney also tweeted last week: 

Delaney co-sponsored a bill back in 2017 called “Recognizing the importance of vaccinations and immunizations in the United States,” which claimed “that vaccines are both effective and safe, and the dissemination of unfounded, and debunked, theories about the dangers of vaccinations pose a great risk to public health.” 

Often mistakenly described as a moderate, Delaney has received a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ+ advocacy and lobbying group. His wife, April, is the Washington, D.C. director of Common Sense Mediaa non-profit media resource for youth founded by James P. Steyer that promotes “must-see TV shows (and stars) [that] celebrate diversity and highlight the LGBTQ+ community in positive, relatable ways.” Both the Human Rights Campaign and Common Sense Media were recipients of $20,000 grants as part of the “20 Days of Kindness” campaign led by actress Melissa McCarthy. The campaign also donated to Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion chain. 

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

RELATED: 

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’ 

Coronavirus vaccine trial volunteer dies in Brazil 

Pfizer coronavirus vaccine must be stored at -70°C – ‘colder than Antarctica’ 


  coronavirus vaccine, john delaney, vaccines

News

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

LifeSite's rosary for November 24, 2020.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:00 am EST
Featured Image
LifeSiteNews.com
By LSN

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church, LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united daily in prayer, in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade.

Catholics from all over the world—from Israel, Uganda, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland, Pakistan, Singapore, the Philippines, India, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and other countries—are gathering daily to pray the rosary, led by Father Anthony Pillari, J.C.L., an American priest currently studying in Italy.

Our goal is, by means of this daily rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima, the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.

To help obtain that goal, Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide rosary crusade:

O Immaculate Heart of Mary, you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother. Look upon the distress in which the Church and the whole of humanity are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church. In Fatima you warned against these errors, as you spoke about the errors of Russia. You are the Mediatrix of all graces. Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope: that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart, so that Russia will be converted, a period of peace will be granted to the world, and your Immaculate Heart will triumph, through an authentic renewal of the Church in the splendor of the purity of the Catholic Faith, of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life. O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother, turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer. Amen.

+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana


To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady’s message at Fatima, and about what you can do, please read Cardinal Burke’s 2017 address at the Rome Life Forum (https://voiceofthefamily.com/full-text-cardinal-burkes-historic-call-for-consecration-of-russia/).

As St. Padre Pio once said, “The rosary is the weapon for these times.” Through prayer, God can shape history, change the world, and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world, through the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. Join us today!

If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this rosary, you can access them via this PDF. This document also includes a brief F.A.Q. pertaining to the daily rosary on LifeSite led by Fr. Pillari.

One of the prayers Fr. Pillari will also be saying for special protection is the following:

"O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee; crush the plans of the enemy under your heel, and obtain from your Divine Son an election according to His Holy Will.” 

For the last 27 days of the 54-day novena, add: “we thank you for obtaining this grace.”

 

You can send your prayer requests and intentions via the contact form found here https://www.lifesitenews.com/rosary


  anthony pillari, catholic, coronavirus, rosary

News

Priest calls police on mother of 11 praying in empty church without a mask

Neither the priest nor the diocese have explained the arrest despite a stated mask exemption for those seated in their pew.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 10:40 am EST
Featured Image
Mother of 11 interviewed by Restoring the Faith Media
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

KANSAS CITY, Missouri, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The pastor of a Catholic Church in Kansas City, Missouri, had a woman arrested as she prayed with her children in the pews of Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church for refusing to wear a mask, despite instructions in the church’s previous Sunday bulletin and the diocesan website stating that masks are required “except when remaining in the pew.”

The mother of 11 children, six of whom are adopted, said in an interview with Restoring the Faith Media that she came to the church with her family to pray Vespers, as she does every year on Halloween. She had arrived early and was praying private devotions with her husband and children when police arrived and arrested her, at the request of the church pastor, Rev. Gary Ziuraitis, C.Ss.R.

The bulletin issued by Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church on October 25 reads, “In accordance with diocesan rules and the current Kansas City ordinance, everyone must wear a mask in church, unless you are seated in your pew.”

The Kansas City police incident report says the pastor told the officers that the mother, whose name she wishes to remain anonymous, was not wearing a mask when she entered the church, and neither were her children.

The mother said that the keyholder of the church yelled at her and her children as they entered for not wearing masks, even though no one was in the church at the time. She continued on to a pew to pray the Divine Mercy chaplet with her children, after which, she reported, the pastor approached them, without wearing a mask himself, and told her that she would have to put on a mask or leave the church.

The police report says, “It is not the Police Department’s position to enforce the mask ordinance in KC, the Health Department does that here. It was [the pastor’s] request that we ask her to leave or arrest her for trespassing.”

The report continues, “About 7 pm the pastor called and relayed to the officers that in addition to the order by Mayor Lucas to wear a mask, it’s the policy of the Catholic Diocese that everybody inside the church wear a mask. There are several signs outside the Church indicating masks are required.”

Kansas City’s emergency order stipulates that “masks are required in all indoor public spaces where people can’t be six feet apart.”

The website of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph currently states, “The faithful are obliged to wear a mask upon entering the church and during the celebration of Mass, except when remaining in the pew [emphasis in the original] unless the local city/county health directives so require and for the brief moment of receiving Holy Communion.”

Not only does the bulletin of Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church restate this exception for those in a pew, but the church is what the mother described as a “monstrosity of a cathedral the size of a football field.” It seats up to 800 people, and has the “longest aisle in Kansas City,” according to the church website.

The bulletin itself said regarding the All Saints Vespers service that evening, “We have plenty of good, safe space in the Church for you to come and enjoy this beautiful hour of prayer.”

LifeSiteNews reached out to Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church, which declined to comment on the mother’s arrest. LifeSiteNews has also reached out repeatedly to the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, but has not received a response.

“Nobody’s asked me to mask for six weeks in any store in Kansas City,” the mother said.

When asked what she thought was wrong with wearing a mask, she said, “If I was made to do that, I would probably faint or throw up. I really physically know I couldn’t mask in church. I just have to go with my gut, and that’s what I did.”

“I did lean on some interviews I saw with priests that were encouraging not to mask and that gave me hope,” she added.

The diocese’s communications office has stated, “The Diocese has no objection to charges being dismissed against the disruptive attendee but that decision would need to be made by the arresting officer.”

However, the Kansas City police said, “The decision to drop the charge of trespassing would be between the Church and Municipal Court.”

The mother was emotional as she recounted how one of her children, Mary, who is autistic, had noticed her rosary fell to the floor as she was being handcuffed, and asked why the police had thrown her rosary down.

The mother had told her, “’Mary, I don’t think they threw my rosary on the floor, I don’t know what happened, but they had to handcuff me, so my rosary was in my hands, and it probably just fell to the floor.’ Mary picked it up and put it in my purse.”

The mother was asked what she would say if she had an opportunity to address the chancery.

“First of all, anyone who has the right to right this — it has to be done. And is it gonna be done? No, I don’t think it’s gonna be done until people say, ‘Stop it. I want my holy water back. I want my confessional. I want my singing. I want my church back.’”

“This is our church, guys. We have to do something. We can’t wait. Now is the time. We cannot wait until the second lockdown. No, that’s going to be too late,” she continued.

“‘Oh, the second lock down, I will get handcuffed, I will do it then.’ No, now. We have to stay in the fight, we are Church Militant.”


  catholic, covid-19, diocese of kansas city-st. joseph, gary ziuraitis, lockdowns, mask mandate, restoring the faith media

News

French Catholics rally with increased numbers demanding return of public Masses

Over 70 rallies were held this past weekend, including many prayerful demonstrations in towns and cities all over the country.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 10:27 am EST
Featured Image
Catholics in Toulouse protest lockdown regulations which prevent the public offering of Mass Civitas / Twitter
Jeanne Smits, Paris correspondent
By Jeanne Smits

Analysis

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The third Sunday without public Masses because of the current COVID-19 lockdown in France saw an increase in often prayerful demonstrations in towns and cities all over the country. Over 70 rallies were held, with many traditionalist Catholics but also “Novus Ordo” faithful, in an unaccustomed spirit of unity. Two emergency lawsuits had confirmed that it is illegal for the administrative authorities to ban a demonstration because of possible public prayers – the motive that was invoked a week earlier to condemn certain rallies and prohibit others, such as in Paris in front of Saint-Sulpice.

While judiciary twists and turns prevented the lawsuits from being successful in allowing the organization of an open-air Mass as had been planned in Clermont-Ferrand, in the center of France, they did allow hundreds of faithful to sing hymns and pray at Saint-Sulpice in Paris. They also underscored the abuse of power on the part of French authorities who had arbitrarily threatened faithful who would sing or pray while asking for the restoration of the fundamental liberty of public worship with fines and bans of demonstrations.

Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin proclaimed a week ago: “I don’t desire to send police forces to issue tickets to believers who are in front of a church, but obviously if this is a repetitive act, and it is manifestly contrary to the laws of the Republic, I will do so.”

The threats did not prevent thousands of Catholics all over the country from praying publicly, either last week or this Sunday. The association “Civitas” hoped to organize open-air prayers and even a Mass in Clermont-Ferrand, according to some sources, and declared it officially at the local “prefecture” (the official representative of central power charged in particular with law-enforcement and the protection of public order). When the “Préfet” issued a ban on the event Civitas used an emergency “liberty” procedure at the local administrative court and obtained victory.

The ban was motivated by the fact that the rally was not a protest demonstration but a “religious event.” Such a distinction, argued Civitas, is not founded in French law, either in the Code of Security of the Interior or in administrative case-law.

The administrative court agreed, judging: “Thus, it does not result from the provisions in force, in particular from the aforementioned decree of October 29, 2020, that a demonstration on the streets may be prohibited in principle, for the sole reason that it could be regarded, by its purpose or form, as the outward manifestation of religious worship.” It added that the ban on the event constituted “a serious and manifestly illegal infringement of the freedom of demonstration.” The judge made clear that both freedom of worship and freedom to demonstrate are fundamental liberties and that public authorities have no right to prohibit a public demonstration because of its religious content.

The decision was handed down on Saturday morning, but was finally not applied. In the afternoon of that day, the “Préfet” once more banned the prayer rally, not for religious motives but because of “sanitary” reasons, despite the fact that confinement rules allow for protest demonstrations of which there are many at present in France, be it on the part of Catholics, small shop-owners who risk bankruptcy because of the confinement regulations or those who oppose the “global security” laws that are presently being adopted by Parliament.

Once again, Civitas lodged an emergency procedure on Saturday evening but this time it was rejected by the administrative court, which validated the Prefect’s second ban. The prayer rally did not take place.

Civitas has announced that it will organize a larger number of prayer events next week and that it will take the affair to the Council of State if necessary.

On the other hand, in Paris, the student group that first launched a major petition against the banning of public Masses, “Pour la Messe,” seized the administrative tribunal after the Paris rally in front of Saint-Sulpice was threatened with a ban for the second time.

The “prefect of police” of Paris, Didier Lallemant, authorized the rally on the condition that there would be “no street prayers on the public roads.” “If these prescriptions are not complied with, participants will be fined and dispersed,” he made clear.

The organizer, Jean-Benoît Harel, took this letter to the administrative court complaining of the restriction of the demonstrators’ liberty. In an emergency decision, the judge decided that the “Préfet” had not demonstrated that the restriction was justified by the necessity to avoid “disturbing the public order.” “He must be regarded as prohibiting in principle a manifestation which, by its purpose or form, would be an outward manifestation of religious worship. Consequently, its decision, in so far as it makes the holding of a demonstration conditional on the prohibition of street prayers, is a serious and manifestly unlawful infringement of the freedom of demonstration,” according to the judge, who formally lifted the restriction.

On Sunday, hundreds joined the rally in front of Saint-Sulpice. Many bore candles, kneeled and sang, as can be seen in this video.

Many other rallies in France included prayers, rosaries and hymns. While some bishops once again distanced themselves from the protests of the faithful, for the second time, Bishop Aillet joined the faithful who prayed in front of Bayonne Cathedral. Three other bishops also joined their flocks, such as Bishop Christory in Chartres.

— 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 Saint-Maur des Fossés, a suburb of Paris, Jérôme Triomphe – the lawyer of the AGRIF, a Christian legal defense group, and of the family of France’s Terri Schiavo, Vincent Lambert – made a striking speech recalling that “the Mass is the treasure of the Church,” because it is the “very supplication of Christ to the Father, that He may forgive sinful and repentant humanity.” “That is why we cannot be saved without it. That is why we cannot do without it,” he proclaimed.

He also quoted the general in chief of the Catholic and Royal Army of the Vendée that fought the anti-Catholic French revolutionaries during the Terror period that followed the 1789 Revolution, François-Athanase de Charette. Charette’s words resonate profoundly with present day fears and hopes:

For us our country is our villages, our altars, our graves, all that our fathers loved before us. Our country is our Faith, our land, our King. But what is their country? Do you understand? Do you? They have it in their brains; we have it under our feet. It is as old as the devil, the world they call new and would establish in the absence of God. They tell us we are the slaves of ancient superstitions; how ridiculous! But in the face of these demons who are reborn century after century, we are youth, gentlemen! We are the youth of God, the youth of faithfulness! And this youth will preserve, for itself and for its posterity, true humanity, and liberty of the soul…

This spirit of freedom is blowing with increasing force in France. It is too early to tell of the priests who are circumnavigating the rules, finding ways to say Mass publicly without risking fines – up to three Masses every Sunday – and the ever larger numbers of faithful who are managing to fulfill their Sunday obligation despite the absurdity of the lockdown rules.

As COVID-19 contaminations and cases of illness continue to fall – but they were already falling before the lockdown was imposed, raising ever more doubts as to the usefulness of such infringement on public liberties – more and more skeptics are asking questions about a nightmarish situation where mental health is being shattered, small businesses are being destroyed and restaurants and bars see no end to the tunnel of debt and inactivity into which the public authorities have thrown them. The Catholic reaction is also a sign of hope, even if it is that of a minority: but a “creative minority,” in the words of Pope Benedict.


  catholic, civitas, coronavirus restrictions, france, freedom of religion, lockdown protests, lockdowns

News

Archbishop rejects state governor’s COVID request, will continue Masses

Gov. Andy Beshear has had his COVID restrictions on religion rebuffed by a judge once already.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 6:00 am EST
Featured Image
Abp. Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Ky. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops / YouTube
Emily Mangiaracina Emily Mangiaracina Follow
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky is standing firm along with other Kentucky bishops in keeping Catholic churches open in the face of Governor Andy Beshear’s non-binding request that houses of worship close during a tightening of gathering restrictions lasting through Dec. 13.

Kurtz, who likewise rejected the governor’s request to close houses of worship for two weeks in August, told WDRB News that he and other state bishops “will not be suspending public liturgies, but encourage all to act in a responsible way that respects the seriousness of this pandemic.”

He pointed out that they would continue to provide virtual streaming of the Church liturgy, as well as dispense Catholics from their Sunday Mass obligation.

— 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

Kurtz suspended Masses earlier this year along with other U.S. bishops, citing CDC guidance advising against the gathering of groups of 50 or more people.

Governor Beshear announced Wednesday that he is clamping down on public and private gatherings in order to “slow” the COVID-19 virus. Schools and indoor dining will be closed, while attendance at gyms, offices, weddings, funerals, and even at private indoor family gatherings is restricted, per Beshear’s executive order.

Beshear’s request that houses of worship also close is a recommendation rather than a mandate. In May, a federal judge ruled Beshear’s previous ban of church gatherings unconstitutional after attorneys for Tabernacle Baptist Church argued that the ban “discriminated against the free exercise of religion.” They pointed out that gatherings were allowed in private businesses, as well as during the governor’s daily briefings, at the same time that church gatherings were prohibited.

Many churches in Kentucky have been continuously streaming their services virtually instead of opening for in-person worship. WDRB News reported that Pastor Tim Findley, Jr. of Kingdom Fellowship Christian Life Center strongly supports Governor Beshear’s recent request. “I think it’s irresponsible for any faith leader to bypass these kinds of recommendations,” said Findley.

The Louisville Courier Journal reported that Beshear’s new restrictions came amid a “record-breaking day” of 3,649 new COVID-19 cases in Kentucky, with a positivity rate of 9.18 percent. “The governor also reported 30 new coronavirus-related deaths. It was the state’s second-highest COVID-19-related death toll for a single day.”


  archdiocese of louisville, catholic, coronavirus, freedom of religion, joseph kurtz, kentucky, lockdown

News

Large Christian family objects after Canadian province bans groups over 5 from leaving home together

'Households with more than 5 members can only go outside the home in groups of up to 5 people,' read the new restrictions in Halifax.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 6:00 am EST
Featured Image
Halifax, Nova Scotia. Paul Brady Photography / Shutterstock.com
Anthony Murdoch
By Anthony Murdoch

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A former police officer with five kids has blasted a Canadian province’s new COVID-19 restrictions that state that households with more than five people cannot go out together and instead must go outside in separate groups.

“This is outright discrimination against large families. It’s a 100 percent infringement on the Charter of Rights, the right of association,” Halifax, Nova Scotia resident; father of five; and former police officer Chris Morris told LifeSiteNews.

“They are purposely making families split up, even if it’s only temporary, so fundamentally if you have more than five people in your family you are forced to obey the law and split your family into at least two.”

— 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 new “gathering limit without social distancing” rule applies only to Halifax and Hant Counties in Nova Scotia and is in effect from November 23 to December 21, 2020. The rule was announced last Friday.

The new rule reads: “Households can only have 5 visitors at a time - Households with more than 5 members can only go outside the home in groups of up to 5 people,” read the new restrictions.

Indoor events with “social distancing” (which includes church services) in the two affected counties are now limited to 50 percent of the venue’s capacity up to a maximum of 100 people, down from 200.

Outdoor events with “social distancing” are now limited to 150 people, with private events such as weddings and funerals limited to 25 people indoors or outdoors.

As of today, Nova Scotia has only 51 active cases of COVID-19 in the province with 65 deaths attributed to it.

Morris currently lives in Halifax with his wife and their five children and works at a Catholic church.

He told LifeSiteNews that as a former police officer who worked in Toronto and Ottawa for 15 years that the new rules, besides being unpractical, are contrary to logic itself.

“This goes against every possible logical thing that could ever exist in this world, there is nothing that supports that as being a good idea,” Morris told LifeSiteNews.

“The obvious situation is, we can’t drop off or pick up our kids from school because I’m at work and then my wife would have to go out.”

LifeSiteNews contacted the government of Nova Scotia to provide clarity to the new rules that do not allow households of more than five to leave their residence together.

Marla MacInnis, media relations adviser for the Department of Health and Wellness for Nova Scotia, confirmed that households with more than five people when “out in the community” need to stay in groups of five or less, although exceptions might be made.

“Some households have more than 5 people. These household members can continue to interact without physical distancing at home. When they go out into the community we ask that families try to stay in groups of 5 or less as much as possible,” MacInnis told LifeSiteNews.

“We understand that in some essential situations, like school drop-offs, there may need to be exceptions[.] ... We understand new restrictions pose challenges but appreciate the effort all Nova Scotians will make to adhere to these protocols and help us reduce the spread of COVID-19.”

Unlike most Canadian provinces, the Nova Scotia government under Liberal premier Stephen McNeil has not had a sitting parliament since March 10.

Last week, McNeil prorogued the Nova Scotia parliament until next year, a move that was criticized by opposition parties as “undemocratic.”

On Monday, McNeil stated that police and peace officers are enforcing the new “single-household bubble,” along with mask-wearing and physical distancing rules, saying thirty tickets were issued over the weekend.

As for Morris, he told LifeSiteNews that McNeil’s choice to shut down the provincial Legislature for months on end makes no sense and means “you can’t even complain if you wanted to.”

“It’s just mind boggling, it’s a one-man show right now, it’s the McNeil show right now which is unreal.”

Morris said that as a family, and even though they have two vehicles, that he and his wife have no choice but to break the new rule, noting they could see some community backlash.

“We’re breaking it. There’s no question about it. We don’t have a choice, really,” Morris told LifeSiteNews.

“We know we are breaking the law, were not worried about repercussions, but there are going to be community repercussions. I have no doubt about that.”

Morris added that he is not worried about any issues with police officers regarding the new rule, as he noted that most have common sense and are not going to target families.

However, Morris told LifeSiteNews he is concerned for their friends with large families who have only one vehicle, as it means they would have no choice but to break the new rule to be able to travel together.

“A lot of our friends have big families and live out in the country with one vehicle. Are they supposed to drive 20 minutes to school and then back and make another trip? That doesn’t make a lot of sense,” Morris told LifeSiteNews.

When asked what can be done about the new rule, Morris said that all it would take is for the government to clarify the situation and state, “There is an exemption for people of the same household, that’s all it takes, it’s not some rocket science.”

“They’ve clearly thought about it because the fact that they acknowledged that households have more than five people means it crossed their mind,” Morris told LifeSiteNews.

Most provinces in Canada have seen additional COVID-19 restrictions imposed to combat an apparent surge in positive cases as reported by local health authorities.

Some doctors, however, have spoken out.

In October, a Canadian physician practicing family medicine for over 40 years, Dr. Stephen Malthouse, wrote to his province’s top doctor to blast the latter’s COVID-19 lockdown policy.

Recently, a Canadian doctor with claimed extensive credentials spared no words in blasting government-imposed COVID-19 measures at a public city meeting in Western Canada last week, calling masks “utterly useless” and saying the virus is “not Ebola.”

Contact information for respectful communication

Premier Stephen McNeil

Phone: 902-424-6600
Fax: 902-424-7648

Toll-Free: 1-800-267-1993

Email: [email protected]

Nova Scotia Members of the Legislative Assembly Contact

Please visit: https://enstools.electionsnovascotia.ca/edinfo2012/


  big brother, coronavirus, halifax, large families, nova scotia, police state

Opinion

Why Christians must not retreat in the culture war but wage a God-centered counter-revolution

A mini-Benedict Option offers nothing new for engaging in the Culture War.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:57 pm EST
Featured Image
shutterstock.com
John Horvat II
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – We live in a time dominated by lies. The media and culture peddle so many things that deny the truth. We are told that some men are really women and some women are really men. Unborn babies are not human. The family is whatever we want it to be. Fake news is everywhere. Lies have become a part of our life, making it surreal as we flee from reality and ultimately from God.

Rod Dreher’s new book, Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian Dissidents, presents itself as a handbook for our time of lies. The title is based on a speech by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, where he urged his fellow Russians not to live by the lies of the deceitful Soviet regime. He presents Soviet-era dissidents as models to help us deal with our lies.   

Thus, the book is a chronicle of interviews with these Eastern European dissidents who survived the Cold War by developing ways of fighting against communist lies. Their testimony and resistance can be very inspiring, for they endured much to be faithful. Mr. Dreher affirms that these same tactics might be applied in our Western society in decay. 

The threat of soft totalitarianism

There are unmistakable signs that our postmodern world is heading in the direction of what the author calls “soft” totalitarianism. He notes that, like decadent czarist Russia, our society is marked by loneliness and social atomization, lost faith in hierarchies and institutions and unbridled sexuality. Our world is falling apart, Mr. Dreher claims. “The old world of classical liberalism is dying throughout the Western world, but its successor has not yet been born.” 

In its place, soft totalitarianism finds its expression in the social justice warriors who seek change through identity politics. “Woke” capitalist corporations enforce and survey workers to root out thought crimes deemed racist, homophobic, transphobic, and any other kind of phobia in vogue. A union of Big Business and Big Brother will lead to a terrifying futuristic brave new world that leaves little room for Christian dissent.

A disappointing micro-Benedict Option

As might be expected, the author of The Benedict Option proposes a variation of his theme of forming small communities to wait out the terrible gathering storm of a hi-tech neo-barbarian age. He does not use the term Benedict Option to describe these mechanisms of survival. The Eastern European equivalents were less formal and smaller groups that we might call mini-Benedict Options.  

Those disappointed by the Benedict Option will also be disappointed by this micro-version. 

The author describes well the monolithic unity of a revolution that threatens all those who defend God’s law. However, he can suggest no opposing unity of a counter-revolution to combat this revolution. Just as his Benedict Option tends to isolate and shatter reactions into a thousand options, this micro-version shatters the resistance yet further, into tiny shards of defiance.

Thus, the book’s collection of guidelines might have some helpful counsels for these shattered shards, but it is not a tactical handbook for engaging in the Culture War. There is nothing new about relying upon the family, religion, solidarity and intermediary groups since they are the God-given institutions that are valid for surviving in all situations, not just the catacomb-like world found in communist Eastern Europe. 

Perhaps the most perplexing problem with Mr. Dreher’s solution is his desire to embrace all under his solidarity banner. We are asked to “throw off the chains of solitude and find the freedom that awaits us in fellowship. The testimony of communist dissidents is clear: Only in solidarity with others can we find the spiritual and communal strength to resist.”

His small solidarity groups build bonds of brotherhood across denominational lines, including secular and liberal allies, “other religions and no religion at all.” These groups are all at once catechetical, ministerial and organizational, replacing institutional church leaders unable to fulfill their roles. 

It appears the unifying factor of these groups is the obvious recognition of the communist lie, which can be defined as the absence of the truth. However, since this absent truth is left undefined, problems set in. Mr. Dreher leaves us with a liberal smorgasbord of beliefs and unbeliefs from which to craft a response to the lie.  

Bringing forth a new Christian civilization

However, this response is not enough. Solidarity alone will not suffice. Indeed, the Eastern European models we are offered failed to resist the onslaught of Western postmodern culture that has corrupted their post-communist societies.

In the effort to construct small communities of solidarity, we must never lose sight of the bigger picture. There must be an effort to understand our present crisis and engage in the Culture War that threatens us. We must construct a counter-revolution counting on the grace of God to help us. We must never lose sight of our desire for victory over evil despite the obstacles we face. 

— 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

 Instead of the subjective ramblings of Protestant existentialist Soren Kierkegaard, whom Mr. Dreher cites, we need the triumphal promises of Our Lady at Fatima. And that is what is missing in his formula for the fight against the enemies of God — be they communists or postmoderns — there is no unified truth or end presented that can give rise to a new Christian civilization. 

John Horvat II is a scholar, researcher, educator, international speaker, and author of the book Return to Order, as well as the author of hundreds of published articles. He lives in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property.


  benedict option, christians, culture war, rod dreher, totalitarianism

Opinion

Even if they win, Democrats will regret 2020 election tactics

People can disagree about abortion, military policy, homosexuality, education, health care, or any major issue. But nobody likes liars.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:44 pm EST
Featured Image
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com
Robert Oscar Lopez
By Robert Oscar Lopez

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — As the fight over electoral votes continues, the stakes are high for conservatives. Countless writers have done a good job explaining this, from John Zmirak to Stella Morabito. But the stakes are even higher for Democrats and liberals.

Let's think about why.

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

All signs point to an increasing amount and authenticity of evidence for voter fraud. While I have many criticisms of liberals, I can say one thing about them that hints of praise. Discounting corrupt leaders at the top, most liberals treasure their sense of righteousness as the most important motivating factor in what they do. As horrible as are many things liberals do, one cannot deny that liberals rally powerfully around their "causes," their collective convictions that injustices exist and their progressive solutions are the right ones.

Many of us on the right would call the left's moral certainty "self-righteousness." But let us proceed for the time being with the assumption, for argument's sake, that we can call it simply righteousness, as in the compelling belief in the rightness of one's beliefs. So powerful is the left's righteousness that leftists win many arguments simply by rhetorical force. They are so unrelenting in their argumentation that conservatives, who are accustomed to having weak-willed and wobbling leaders, concede to them out of sheer awe before the liberals' perseverance.

Many things have happened that should have exposed the flaws in liberals' righteous self-perception, ranging in seriousness from the sexual sins of Democratic donors like Harvey Weinstein and Ed Buck to the vast financial corruption behind the left's fake environmentalism, the Clinton Foundation, and the Bidens' graft in hotspots like Ukraine and China.

But those things, for various reasons, didn't "stick." As numerous as these skeletons were, they weren't numerous enough to break open the closet where the left's alliance of media, academia, and politicians hid them. Many conservatives, busy with their daily lives, didn't know much about these scandals and never connected their moral implications to the liberals they argued with in their daily lives.

The election of 2020 is different. Having been through a year of COVID and urban unrest, issues that would normally remain distantly political felt extremely personal to Americans. Both issues developed a partisan taste, because the left weaponized COVID against the right and the right weaponized urban unrest against the left. Both issues produced an obvious disconnect between what people experienced in their daily lives and what liberal-dominated commentators were saying in the media.

Carrying a newfound personal urgency with them to the polls, many people went to great lengths to cast their ballots. Their voting felt intimate and important. And then the election became a disaster that dragged on for weeks. Prior to the election, the left told us there would be no problem with mail ballots. Then when the mail ballots caused nightmares in terms of tabulation, verification, security, and timeliness, the left told us there would be no proof of fraud. Then, as more testimonials of fraud surfaced and the strange statistics heightened our suspicions, the left told us there was fraud but it was not widespread. This, too, broke down as we saw more solid evidence of voting "irregularities" in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada, enough states to make us consider "widespread" a perfectly appropriate adjective.

Finally, the left said these widespread frauds would not reach an amount large enough to reverse the election. And then Sidney Powell released the Kraken, revealing cold statistics about the millions of votes tabulated by a digital balloting company that nobody sane could trust.

People can disagree about abortion, military policy, homosexuality, education, health care, or any major issue. But nobody likes liars. Nobody trusts liars. The worst thing that can happen to a group of people is to develop a reputation for lying, especially in the realm of democratic politics, where your entire right to hold office depends upon the public's faith in your word.

Perhaps worse than lying is cheating. You can let it pass if you catch your girlfriend telling you a fib here and there, but when you catch her in bed with your best friend, that's almost always a deal-breaker. There's a special contempt reserved for sports teams that get trophies based on bad calls by referees, especially if you find out the referees were bribed. People detest boxing matches that turn out to have been fixed. In twenty years as a professor, I recall vividly how deeply people's reputations sank if they got caught cheating. Often other students would despise their cheating classmates much more than the professors would care.

Sometimes it seems as though liberals would like racism and sexism to be classified as more severe than lying and cheating. For whatever reason, they've never succeeded at changing people's moral compass in that way. Even most liberals view dishonesty as a worse character trait than prejudice, which explains partly why so many of their attacks on supposed racists involve accusing them of a hidden prejudice that the accused would deny.

The left lied and cheated — not everybody on the left, but enough so that Joe Biden, no matter what happens in the future, will be associated permanently in the minds of Trump-supporters with lies and cheating.

Unlike earlier scandals, the dishonesty surrounding Biden's 2020 election margins has taken hold of an enormous number of Americans. A recent poll found that 47% of people responding to pollsters believed it likely that Biden's victory came from cheating.

That statistic is simply catastrophic. Even worse is the probability that the "shy Trump voter" who skewed the polls prior to the election is probably also afraid to tell a pollster what he really thinks about voter fraud.

I don't believe that the percentage of Americans who think the liberals cheated will go down. It will only increase. While only God knows the full truth, all the evidence I've seen from Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis points to the high chance that more evidence (and increasingly substantial evidence) will come out revealing massive, nationwide fraud perpetrated to steal a presidential election.

Let's go back to the metaphor of the cheating girlfriend. If you have a girlfriend who nags and belittles you constantly, telling you every hour that you're doing something wrong, and then you catch her in bed with your best friend, the damage to your girlfriend's position will be multiplied because not only will she lose her confidence in dealing with you — also, you will have undergone a mental change and simply won't put up with her criticism for a long time.

Think of Trump-supporters and Biden-supporters as a boyfriend and girlfriend in just such a relationship. We came visited early to surprise our girlfriend, and there she is in flagrante delicto, right in the bedroom, curtains blowing in the breeze, with the sleaziest gang of Democratic fraudsters and Republican collaborators.

Over time, liberals will have to concede that they're caught. Their loss of righteousness will cost them more dearly than anything that they've ever lost in the past, because their righteousness was the fuel that animated them for so many decades. Eventually, it will sink in that they were on the side of lying and cheating, not only through silent complicity, but also through their vicious mockery of Trump-supporters during the naïve weeks when they maintained the façade that no fraud took place.

And they will have to deal with us, their boyfriend. It shocked liberals that after four years of demonizing Trump, they found that he won ten million more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Liberals must confront the reality that we haven't believed them in a long time and that much of their passionate rhetoric has been falling on deaf ears, unbeknownst to them.

But it will get worse. Millions of Trump-supporters who were content with shyness and silence before will now feel emboldened to stand up to liberals. They have nothing to lose, since this election fiasco has made it clear that liberals will lie and cheat, so we can't trust any of their conciliatory measures or promises of collaboration, healing, or unity.

With the stain of dishonesty, liberals will lose everything. Stripped of righteousness, none of the data they cite to promote their views on climate change, immigration, or anything else will hold weight.

They have to decide whether it is worth it to continue pretending Biden's "win" came with no reasonable suspicions. I don't think it is. I think if they trudge ahead, sticking to the same story, they face a catastrophe that will be far worse than swallowing their pride, admitting they got the fraud issue wrong, and letting a real investigation play out.

Robert Oscar Lopez can be followed at BOBBYLOPEZ.METwitterParler, or Gatekeepersonline.com.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, american thinker, voter fraud

Opinion

Too many conservatives gave up on 2020 election before the fight even started

A sentiment of capitulation, of opportunistic coddling of the Democrats, was distressingly evident.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:38 pm EST
Featured Image
Mitt Romney. mark reinstein / Shutterstock.com
David Solway
By David Solway

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — One of the many disheartening aspects of the current electoral scandal, the greatest fraud ever perpetrated in the history of the United States, is the extent to which a significant number of conservatives and conservative news-and-opinion sites have opted to take a "cautious approach" — as one of my editors said — to what they see as an impending Democrat victory or a victory they regard as already given. It is as if they have decided to "play nice" in the hope of being spared retribution by the enemy following its putative occupation of the White House.

Thus, Democrat shills and prevaricating spokespeople are treated with a certain respect or cited neutrally while individuals and organizations fighting for justice, constitutionality and electoral integrity, and struggling to expose the workings of the great hoax, are either ignored, condescended to, or criticized. I have read many articles written by people nominally on the right or center-right where a sentiment of capitulation, of opportunistic coddling of the Democrats, was distressingly evident, as if they had given up the fight and were already accustoming themselves to a Biden dispensation. Others seem to be buckling under corporate pressure. Tucker Carlson's irascible snit, for example, over Sidney Powell's refusal to show her hand in her ongoing investigation of the electoral swindle, which the courts would likely have seen as premature and prejudicial to her cause and which would have provided her adversaries with information they could have used, is a case in point.

— 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 practice of reluctance, the unwillingness to confront the scandal in which as many as possibly ten million votes* may have been either fraudulently cast or illicitly rejected in Biden's favor, along with the implicit and over-hasty assumption that Biden has won the White House, together contribute to Biden's momentum toward a counterfeit victory. It is astonishing that such conservatives cannot see, in virtue of such behavior, that they have become the de facto allies of a criminal party, a spurious election, and a corrupt and devious challenger. They will have helped to bring the disaster about.

Some conservatives try to console themselves with a vision of a redemptive future.

One of the assumptions floating around is that Trumpian populism has taken root in the culture, ensuring that the nation can weather four years of Bidenesque incompetence and treachery; come back in 2024, perhaps with Trump or possibly Nikki Haley at the helm; and exact revenge on a felonious presidency. This is a pipe dream if ever there was one.

Four years of a Biden administration will see the further entrenching of systematic electoral fraud plus a tornado of grateful refugees, illegal aliens and Muslim immigrants from Somalia and similar regions, on whose votes the Democrats can count with complete assurance. The result is inevitable. The papier-mâché charade of a two-party political system will remain in place, but Republicans will never win another election, and America will have devolved into an undeclared one-party nation — effectively, a leftist totalitarian regime.

This is not a mere hypothesis, but a plausible eventuality in the absence of popular resistance and judicial redress. It represents what is at stake as the current electoral disgrace unfolds. Clearly, an event on this scale, which is like the impact of a political asteroid wiping out all signs of decency, propriety, and constitutional legitimacy cannot be passed over or validated. Its unprecedented magnitude must be acknowledged and no responsible citizen, columnist, or judge, and certainly no conservative-oriented outlet, should permit it to succeed.

If conservatives do not man the ramparts and defend the citadel — the City on a Hill — by recognizing the true nature of the forces arrayed against them, by ceasing to ply the political calculations of mollification and caution, by supporting their friends and colleagues rather than reproving them, and by fighting tooth and nail to defend their patrimony, they will have surrendered a country that should still have been theirs.

*Video interview with Sidney Powell may still be found here.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, american thinker, voter fraud

Opinion

CNN, insisting on Biden victory, was concerned about fraudulent voting machines in 2006

Compelling television in light of claims being made now about Dominion and Smartmatic.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:10 pm EST
Featured Image
Primakov / Shutterstock.com
Thomas Lifson
By Thomas

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — Perhaps the most dogmatic Trump-hating network of all was very concerned about Venezuela corrupting our elections via Smartmatic voting machines. Yes, CNN!

Watch this report from CNN, hosted by Lou Dobbs in his pre-FBN career, and reported by Kitty Pilgrim, who was always, in my view, a straight shooter. The report raises the question: why should U.S. elections be subject to manipulation by a foreign country, Venezuela, a country that is totally hostile?

The video is four and a half minutes long, and the picture quality is not good, but it is compelling television in light of claims being made now about Dominion and Smartmatic.

— 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

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, american thinker, cnn, mainstream media, voter fraud

Opinion

This stock market tool sheds light on how 2020 voter fraud might have happened

At the New York Stock Exchange, trading is halted when the market dips below specified levels during a single trading day. This appears to be the most logical explanation for what happened on Election Night.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 7:03 pm EST
Featured Image
Jirapong Manustrong / Shutterstock.com
William Sullivan
By William Sullivan

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — According to the media, Trump and his deplorables are doing a great disservice to the nation by demanding assurances about the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. After all, Joe Biden has been all but inaugurated by news personalities and the Democratic Party, and the social media censors have assured us that there's no evidence of any wrongdoing, so it's obviously just a waste of time and energy to mull the outlandish possibility that Americans are the victims of what Biden described (either carelessly or carefully) as the "most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." 

Funny thing, though: The public doesn't seem to agree that the idea of a stolen election is so fringy. At the risk of lending credence to that archaic and thoroughly discredited barometer of public opinion known as polling, a new survey shows that not only nearly half of Americans think the election was stolen from Trump, but nearly 30 percent of Democrat voters think the election was stolen from Trump.

— 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

That's an incredible number. Consider that roughly the same percentage of Democrats believe that their own party may have stolen the 2020 election as the percentage of Democrats who are supportive of late-term abortion. Democrats guilty of having the former suspicion are reviled as members of a fringe cabal of evil conspiracy theorists, while supporters of the latter atrocity write the Democratic Party platform on abortion and earn media applause. Curious how that works.

The question looms: just how does it come to be that three quarters of Republican and nearly one third of Democrat voters all believe that the election was stolen from Trump?

The reason why so many voters, and even Democrat voters, might believe that this election was stolen is really quite simple. It's that, much to the media's chagrin, we Americans still have eyes to see the obvious signs of election fraud that exist.

Election night in 2020 was different from anything that I, or anyone else, has ever seen, and there are numerous indicators suggesting that the election was stolen from Trump. The media's continued pretending that there aren't can only serve to fuel the public's skepticism about the results and our apprehension about the integrity of future elections.

Americans all witnessed the obvious anti-Trump slant in election reporting by the media and pollsters in the weeks leading up to the election, all pointing to a Biden blowout. We saw the same in 2016, so there was nothing new in that. Few were buying it this time around, though, and we watched the Vegas odds flip from Donald Trump being a slight underdog early in the day to being an 8-to-1 favorite just a few hours after polls closed on Election Night. 

It was as evident to anyone watching as it was to the gamblers in Vegas that Trump was on the path to victory. Then everything changed when Arizona was bafflingly called for Biden by Fox News, and news anchors began telling viewers they shouldn't expect any more reported results for the night in the several states where Trump was surging and that it might take days to sort those results out. All the feverish interest in the results that we'd seen all evening was suddenly gone.

What happened?

At the New York Stock Exchange, trading is halted when the market dips below specified levels during a single trading day. A seven-percent daily drop in the S&P 500, for example, triggers a 15-minute trading halt. Another 15-minute halt would occur at a 13-percent daily drop in the index, and trading would end for the day altogether with a 20-percent drop. These are known as market circuit breakers, and they're designed to halt calamitous market trends.

Such a mechanism should obviously not apply to elections, unless those administrating the elections feel that too significant a trend in one direction would be calamitous. Yet, for many, this appears to be the most logical explanation for what happened on Election Night. When Trump looked to be only hours away from securing his victory, a circuit breaker was triggered in those swing states where Trump was surging.

We Americans awoke to an entirely different reality when reporting resumed. Trump had suddenly become an underdog. Massive, Biden-heavy ballot dumps and improbable statistical anomalies appeared, particularly in and around cities like Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Detroit, and Atlanta, which are all run by corrupt Democratic machines. This aided Biden in recovering from a deficit of hundreds of thousands of votes in those swing states where Trump had only won by tens of thousands of votes only four years ago, and in spite of Trump earning more votes than any other presidential candidate in American history — with the lone exception, we are told to believe, of a doddering, plagiarizinggropy, unquestionably corrupt swamp creature who hid in the basement throughout the election and has difficulty stringing a sentence together, even when a teleprompter is directing him.

We all saw the unprecedented energy around Trump's campaign in 2020, which earned him 10 million new voters since 2016, including a greater share of all ethnic minorities and women. And we also saw the equally unprecedented lethargy of Biden campaign events, which couldn't draw more than flies and a few news cameras. Are we to believe that that guy got more votes than Obama in 2008, and more than Trump in 2020? 

Apparently, for almost half of Americans, our own eyes and simple logic suggest not. 

There's no mystery as to why people have serious questions about what we saw go down on Election Night. Are we seriously expected to accept that Trump gave up a lead of tens or hundreds of thousands of votes in states like Michigan (which lives under perpetual, soul-sucking, and Democrat-induced COVID lockdowns) or Wisconsin (which has been ravaged by left-wing riots that were stoked and allowed to proliferate by Democratic leadership) or Pennsylvania (in which hundreds of thousands of families subsist on an energy industry that Biden has pledged to destroy), all under cover of darkness and absent ample bipartisan oversight, without substantial proof that fraud didn't take place?

There needs to be a truthful and believable explanation as to how and why this coordinated circuit breaker was triggered on Election Night, if not to reverse the trajectory of the election that all Americans were witnessing. Americans have never seen anything like it, or the countless irregularities that followed. An engaged citizenry should demand answers for all of this. And an honest, functioning media would certainly demand accountability for it, rather than suggesting that anyone questioning it is somehow a threat to our democracy.

After all, if the scenario were reversed, does any among us think Democrats would be demanding anything less than answers and accountability?

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, american thinker, voter fraud

Opinion

Evidence mounting of election-swinging vote fraud in Virginia, too

Hundreds of thousands of votes 'lost' in the Old Dominion?
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:56 am EST
Featured Image
Governor Ralph Northam of Virginia.
Nick Chase
By Nick Chase

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — Based on Internet blogger "Pede's" analysis of "votes switched" from Trump to Biden, and of "votes lost" (thrown away) -- mostly votes for Trump, and my own analyses to detect imaginary "votes added" for Biden, I have decided to continue examining states where everylegalvote.com says ballot fraud occurred in the 2020 presidential election.

"Pede" identified two states -- Virginia and Minnesota -- where there were hundreds of thousands of "votes lost," a sure indicator of fraud, even though those states' votes are not being recounted, nor are there legal challenges. Additionally, AT's Andrea Widburg, on November 16 in "There may have been massive voter fraud in Virginia", noted strange happenings in the vote totals and allocations in the wee hours of November 4. I have read the JSON code provided by the New York Times (see below), and I concur.

Translating the code in the graphic above, we see that at 11:03 PM EST on November 3, total votes were 2,724,165, and Trump had 1,419,290 votes (52.1%), Biden had 1.258,564 votes (46.2%), other candidates had 46,311 votes (1.4%).

Between 11:14 and 11:42 came a big Biden vote dump. At 11:43, when the dump had ended, total votes were 3,368,181, and Trump had 1,512,627 votes (45.8%) and Biden had 1,771,663 votes (52.6%). During this half-hour period when the fraudsters switched the lead from Trump to Biden, Trump gained 93,337 votes (a 6.58% increase), and Biden gained 513,099 votes (a 40.77% increase). That is, there were about 5.5 Biden votes for every Trump vote during this interval.

— 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

Before the dump, during the heat of the count, Trump votes were rolling in at the rate of almost 8,000 per minute. After the dump (in the half-hour that followed), Trump votes accumulated at the rate of about 1,900 per minute. During the dump, Trump votes piled up at the rate of 2300 per minute, so it appears to me that those Trump votes were being counted more-or-less honestly, without any "votes switched" or "votes lost". So, Biden's outsized vote tally I rate as "votes added", and by my calculation this means about 479,337 fraudulent votes were created for Biden.

Now we come to the real craziness that happened just after midnight on November 4. Here is the JSON code from the New York Times between 12:04 AM and 12:01 PM EST:

And here is my line-by line description of the "events" that the code identifies. I've numbered these lines so I can refer back to them:

1. 12:04 AM, total votes 3,524,459; Trump 1,617,727 votes (45.9%), Biden 1,846,817 votes (52.4%).

2. 12:07 AM, total votes 3,572,807; Trump, 1,643,491 votes (46.0%), Biden 1,872,151 votes (52.4%).

3. 12:12 AM, total votes 3,199,165; Trump, 1,605,981 votes (50.2%), Biden 1,541,998 votes (48.2%).

4. 12:26:21 AM, total votes 3,390,813; Trump, 1,678,452 votes (49.5%), Biden 1,654,717 votes (48.8%).

5. 12:26:48 AM, total votes 3,782,386; Trump, 1,758,890 votes (46.5%), Biden 1,963,058 votes (51.9%).

6. 12:30 AM, total votes 3,390,813; Trump, 1,678,452 votes (49.5%), Biden 1,654,717 votes (48.8%).

7. 12:38 AM, total votes 3,439,609; Trump, 1,699,167 votes (49.4%), Biden 1,685,408 votes (49.0%).

8. 12:42 AM, total votes 3,441,979; Trump, 1,700,338 votes (49.4%), Biden 1,686,570 votes (49.0%).

9. 12:43 AM, total votes 3,442,999; Trump, 1,700,841 votes (49.4%) Biden 1,687,070 votes (49.0%).

10. 12:58 AM, total votes 3,488,507; Trump, 1,709,368 votes (49.0%), Biden 1,719,834 votes (49.3%).

11. 1;34 AM, total votes 3,498,592; Trump, 1,717,808 votes (49.1%), Biden 1,724,806 votes (49.3%).

12. 2:17 AM, total votes 3,894,363; Trump, 1,795,301 votes (46.1%), Biden 2,032,857 votes (52.2%).

13. 4:00 AM, total votes 4,157,392; Trump, 1,916,558 votes (44.8%), Biden 2,224,204 votes (53.5%).

14. 4:59 AM, total votes 4,312,181; Trump, 1,927,545 votes (44.7%), Biden 2,315,641 votes (53.7%).

15. 8:02 AM, total votes 4,312,181; Trump, 1,927,545 votes (44.7%), Biden 2,315,641 votes (53.7%).

Here is, in my opinion, the explanation for the screwy stuff that was going on between midnight and 4 AM on November 4:

Remember, earlier in the evening of November 3 Trump had a huge lead of 500,000-plus votes which the crooks had to eliminate; thus between 11:14 and 11:43 they created an enormous, out-of-thin-air surge of almost a half-million votes for Biden which, at 11:33 PM on November 3, suddenly flipped the lead in the race from Trump to Biden.

But this fraudulent maneuver had two problems. First, it was hard to believe, a sudden vote swing of 4.5% in just 8 minutes; and second, those half-million fake Biden votes might show more "votes" cast than there were registered voters to cast them, making the fraud immediately obvious. So the crooks had to lower the overall vote total to bring it more into line with the 2016 and prior presidential elections.

In Line 2 you see what was probably the running count of the total votes before the fakers got to work -- 3,572,807 votes.

In Line 3, at 12:12 AM, the fraud began, by calling up data that looks like was from an hour earlier. Total votes suddenly shrank to 3,199,165, a loss of 373,462 votes.

In an honest election the vote totals never go backwards. They always get larger, because votes are continually being counted and added to the totals. This is prima facie evidence of fraud being committed, by humans directly intervening in the tabulation of votes, in real time. Software "algorithms" don't work this way; the do their dirty work surreptitiously, in small increments.

However, the old data in Line 3 also flipped the election back to Trump (50.2%) from Biden (48.2%) -- definitely not what the crooks wanted. Also, from Line 2 to Line 3 Biden lost 37,510 votes, and it was important to the fraudsters to recover those. So in Lines 4 and 5 they got to work, restoring Biden's lead (51.9%) by adding 421,060 Biden votes compared to Trump's (46.5%) additional 152,909 votes.

But this action inflated the overall vote total to 3,782,386, which re-created the problem of too many total votes. So the crooks backtracked. They "deleted" Line 5 by "restoring" the data in Line 4. If you look at Line 4 and Line 6 (highlighted in yellow), you will see that they have identical data, except for the timestamp.

Thereafter, the vote thieves proceeded more cautiously, slowly bleeding votes from Trump and adding them to Biden (Lines 7 through 14) until, at 5 AM, the race was over.

As far as I can tell, the 372,462 votes that were thrown away at 12:12 AM never came back, except to the extent the fraudsters created votes out of thin air for Biden.

During the past two decades, enough D.C. swamp dwellers have settled in the northern Virginia suburbs to turn the state from red to purple, so it's possible that Basement Biden would have won the state without the fraud. But that’s not the point.

The point is that the U.S.A won't survive as a free country without honest elections. The evidence I have shown here, by itself, should be sufficient to say that the Virginia 2020 election has been irredeemably corrupted, and the results should not be certified. And if they are certified, they should be contested in court. And a criminal investigation should be opened to identify and prosecute the vote thieves, and when they're found guilty, they should be put in jail for a long, long time.

Virginia

November 21 unofficial vote totals: Trump -- 1,958,619, Biden -- 2,384,014.

"Pede's" numbers: Votes switched from Trump to Biden -- 12,163; "Lost votes" -- 789,023.

    (remember, I'm allocating 85% of "lost votes" to Trump, 15% to Biden)

Deduction for fraudulent electronic votes added to Biden: -- 479,337.

Adjusted totals: Trump -- 2,629,289 (56.5%), Biden -- 2,023,030 (43.5%).

Trump wins (13 electoral votes).

Previous articles in this series: Examining the code, internet geeks conclude 'Trump's win was yuuuge'; 'Lost votes' are fraud votes; It's in the code: Trump won Michigan and Wisconsin.

Nick Chase is a retired but still very active writer, editor and webmaster, and records classical music concerts for radio broadcast. You can read more of his work on the American Thinker website and at contrariansview.org.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.


  2020 election, american thinker, virginia, voter fraud

Opinion

Vote fraud on a huge scale will prove impossible to hide

Nobody can hide industrial scale fraud, of any sort, for long: Medicaid fraud, stock manipulation, fake invoices. The bigger the fraud, the harder it is to hide.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:39 am EST
Featured Image
Prostock-studio / Shutterstock.com
Jay Valentine
By Jay Valentine

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — People, we need to talk.

Way too many are caught in a media-induced despondency, knowing the presidential election was stolen, in the dark of night, vote counting suddenly stopped, vote counts on the television switched from Trump to Biden – yet each thinks he or she is the only one who saw it.

Why do I feel so alone?

— 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

Nobody can hide industrial scale fraud, of any sort, for long: Medicaid fraud, stock manipulation, fake invoices. The bigger the fraud, the harder it is to hide and thus the greater probability it is all going to come out. The words "…this would be the crime of the century" will likely be Tucker Carlson's "read my lips, no new taxes…." a year from now.

Let's talk about industrial level fraud. 

It's all over the place. 

Our teams uncovered some of the largest Medicaid fraud rings in the country. Doctors, attorneys, chiropractors, groups of recent immigrants all living in the same apartment building in Patterson, NJ. These connections were one of the largest "swoop and squat" insurance frauds ever discovered.

We broke the largest internet auction fraud in history and built the technology that enabled a major tech company to determine that Mary Jones was actually Sam McCarthy and Steven Simms, even though they had not a single field in common.

We know a bit about industrial scale fraud. So do a lot of people. 

Remember Bernie Madoff?

Bernie was able to defraud some of the greatest talents in America for decades because he was just a charming guy. Or so they said. 

Meet Harry Markopolos. Harry is reported to be a bit of an eccentric, as many fraud investigative types are, and beginning as early as 2001 he started sending the Securities and Exchange Commission materials showing the Madoff stuff was a scam.

Nobody listened. People kept investing. $50 billion of fraud here, so it does qualify as industrial scale even though one guy did all the work. Apparently, Bernie and Harry were not pals so Harry did not get subjected to the Bernie charm. Harry saw the fraud – just like the "Emperor has no clothes" tale we learn as children. Nobody paid attention. It all fell apart because Bernie could not continually increase the scale of a Ponzi scheme. That is the fatal flaw in Ponzi stuff.

Meet Elizabeth Holmes. Liz is the poster child (she was 19) who founded Theranos, a Silicon Valley company who created a machine to spin straw into gold. Or more accurately, a machine that could take a pinprick of blood and diagnose scores of diseases or conditions. Elizabeth Holmes was far more colorful than Bernie Madoff always being photographed in a black turtleneck with her remarkable blue eyes and blonde hair.

Elizabeth ran an industrial scale fraud. She is now awaiting trial and her counsel is looking to make the insanity defense. Really, no kidding.

The insanity was her board of directors: Henry Kissinger, William Perry (former Secretary of Defense), Mad Dog Jim Mattis, remember him? And rounding out the team with a core Republican, meet George Shultz.

Everything was just going swimmingly for Liz and the team. Google her name and see the adoring press. Except there was this one guy, John Carreyrou, an intrepid reporter at the Wall Street Journal. Acting on a tip, he started digging in and learned the machines not only did not work, the blood tests were faked.

Carreyrou wrote a book and I commend it to you for the details. But what is relevant here is how these famous names, and their lead attorney, David Boies, circled the wagons to essentially deny the allegations. Apart it fell. Investors sued. Board members quit. You know the drill.

What is important in both examples is that smart people who should have known better denied the fraud even when an outside person showed it to them in black and white. Shultz even had his nephew, who worked at Theranos, tell him it was a scam and he believed Liz. Wonder where the nephew is having his Thanksgiving dinner.

Smart people do that. It is one of the best covers for fraud – people will fight their own lying eyes, their own common sense, because they want to believe they were not stupid. They want to believe Liz and Bernie are just great people. So they do. 

The problem starts with Harry Markopolos and Carreyrou, and now Sidney Powell and Lin Wood. These people are a major pain in the butt. 

First, they won't go away. Second, they keep digging, third, they find stuff, then they pull a thread and they get a starting point.

That one honest person or two, here, are Kryptonite to industrial scale fraud.

When investigating industrial level fraud, the most important part is the starting point. "Why is this thing happening this way?" "This is peculiar." "Hmmmm."

Sidney Powell, Lin Wood and their team are pulling a bunch of threads, starting points. When things start to fall apart, they cascade. First a few clues come in, then a bunch then everything comes loose.

In the early day, which is now, there is a human tendency for many not to believe their lying eyes. The media, all in on this, promote that the Liz and Bernie equivalents are nice people, there is no proof of fraud. That's what Markopolos and Carreyrou heard too.

Witnesses were threatened. Attorneys attacked for probing. Carreyrou saw a bit of that. Even after Carreyrou published his first story about Theranos fraud, the Wall Street Journal management had Liz at one of their events. This is how this stuff works!

In the end, which is not far out, it all comes apart.

It always does. Industrial scale fraud is not sustainable because lies that big just cannot be hidden.

Sidney Powell and Lin Wood aren't going away.

Get some sleep.

Jay Valentine's website is www.JayValentine.com.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.


  2020 election, american thinker, vote fraud

Opinion

What’s really going on regarding Trump’s break with vote fraud lawyer Sidney Powell

There are two ways to view all this.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:19 am EST
Featured Image
Sidney Powell on Fox’s Sunday Morning Futures, Nov. 10 2020 Fox News / Vvdeo screen grab
Andrea Widburg
By Andrea Widburg

Big Tech is censoring us. Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news.  Subscribe now.

November 24, 2020 (American Thinker) — You probably already know that Trump's legal team announced that Sidney Powell is not a team member. The brief statement leaves unanswered the most important question: "Why?" Absent solid information, speculation leads us either to "This is the beginning of the end" or "This is all part of the plan" — and I'm leaning to the latter.

Events happened with head-spinning speed. On Thursday, Trump's legal team held a press conference. Rudy Giuliani talked about traditional voter fraud (cemetery voters, faked ballots, etc.); Sidney Powell talked about corrupt, or corruptible, election software, a familiar topic to the State of TexasNPR, and MSNBC; and Jenna Ellis reminded the press that the conference was not an evidentiary hearing but was, instead, an opening statement.

— 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

For over a week, Powell has been making the media rounds, asserting that the system used in several states — Dominion Software, running on Smartmatic machines — originated in Venezuela when Hugo Chávez wanted a system that could cleanly swing elections his way. She spoke about votes being counted abroad, software changes, and vote manipulation over the internet.

While her numbers were breathtaking (Trump "had at least 80 million votes"), Powell's stated facts tracked available information: Smartmatic came out of Venezuela; in 2007, Smartmatic announced that it was selling its Sequoia Voting Systems to Dominion; the chairman of Smartmatic's board is a George Soros crony; the system is easily hackable; Georgia's system was vulnerable; and the data coming out of the swing states shows anomalies that cannot occur naturally. (You can see all the known evidence here.) These facts made Powell's contentions sound credible.

On Thursday and Friday, there was a public spat between Tucker Carlson and Powell. Carlson claimed that Powell had no evidence and got nasty when he pushed; Powell asserted that she offered evidence, but Tucker got nasty because it wasn't when he wanted.

This spat put Trump-supporters in the uncomfortable position of choosing between, on the one hand, a lawyer who took on the federal government and proved that its attack on Gen. Michael Flynn was a set-up intended to take down both Flynn and then newly elected President Trump and, on the other hand, a television personality who's been braver than most in calling out leftism and standing up against his own company's quisling tendencies. (See also what a warrior for truth Sidney Powell has always been.)

And then this:

The Washington Examiner added the claim that "sources close to the president" say Powell lacks evidence, which explains the distancing. Ask yourself if any "sources close to" Trump has ever been correct. They're invariably NeverTrumps. It's possible that this time the source could be correct, but I caution patience.

Powell's response was swift (although it's been deleted from Twitter):

Michael Flynn, Jr., the general's son, parlayed some initial information:

He later added background:

That makes sense. If Powell represents the campaign, the government regulates individual donations. If she's apart from the campaign, things are less constrained.

Lin Wood also chimed in, assuring people Powell is still in the game:

There are two ways to view all this:

The "it's all over" viewpoint. Powell overpromised, and she's become a source of danger and mortification who must be jettisoned.

The "there is a deep game afoot" viewpoint. Here are the moving parts behind this approach:

1. The facts about Dominion and Smartmatic, above.

2. The strong statistical indication about voter fraud, also above.

3. Powell's statement to Larry O'Connor on Friday that she represents the people, not the president:

4. The information that Michael Flynn, Jr. and Lin Wood provided about the administration separating from Powell for financial reasons and her still being in the fight.

Currently, I believe that this election was marked by epic fraud. You cannot convince me that Biden, who got five or six people to his rallies, as opposed to the 52,000 or so at Trump's rallies in Pennsylvania, ended with more votes than Obama.

Nobody ever said proving this fraud would be easy (or, sadly, even possible). I'm treating its unfolding like an epic novel with a surprise ending. I just wish I knew whether it was going to be a happy or a tragic ending.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Help stop voter fraud: Project Veritas is accepting voter fraud tips here.


  2020 election, american thinker, donald trump, sidney powell, voter fraud

Opinion

‘Disturbing similarities’: Viganò compares McCarrick Report to COVID, 2020 electoral fraud

'On closer inspection,' the exiled archbishop writes, 'both the pandemic and the electoral fraud in the United States have disturbing similarities to the McCarrick case and to what is happening in the Church.'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:00 am EST
Featured Image
Pajor Pawel / Shutterstock.com
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The McCarrick Report published by the Secretariat of State on November 10, 2020, has been the object of numerous comments. Some point out its shortcomings, while others praise it as a proof of Bergoglio’s transparency and the groundlessness of my accusations. I would like to focus on some aspects that deserve to be further explored, which do not concern me personally. The purpose of these reflections is thus not to adduce further evidence concerning the falsity of arguments raised against me, but rather to highlight the inconsistencies of the report and the conflict of interest that exists between the one who judges and the one being judged, which in my opinion is such as to invalidate the investigation, the trial, and the sentence.

The disinterestedness of the judging body

First of all, I must say that, in contrast with a normal civil or penal trial, in ecclesiastical investigations there is a sort of implicit right to credibility in testimonies given by clerics. This seems to have allowed even testimonies of prelates who could find themselves in a position of complicity with regard to McCarrick to be considered as evidence, even though they would have had no interest in revealing the truth, since doing so would have harmed themselves and their own image. In short, to borrow an image from Carlo Collodi, it is hard to imagine that the Cat (Kevin Farrell) could credibly exonerate the Fox (Theodore McCarrick); yet this is what has happened, just as it was possible to deceive John Paul II about the advisability of appointing McCarrick as Cardinal Archbishop of Washington, or Benedict XVI about the gravity of the accusations that weighed on the cardinal.

By now it is understood that this right to credibility, when applied to the Argentine, has risen to the level of a dogma, perhaps the only dogma that cannot be questioned in the church of mercy, especially when alternative interpretations of reality – which mortals prosaically call lies – are formulated precisely by him.

We are also left bewildered by the fact that Msgr. Farrell’s testimony in defense of McCarrick has been reported with emphasis – the Bishop is even referred to with the title of “Most Excellent” – but that at the same time the testimony of James Grein was completely omitted, just as the choice was prudently made not to take a deposition from the Secretaries of State Sodano and Bertone. Nor is it clear for what reason Farrell’s words in defense of his friend and housemate are considered valid and credible, while mine are not, even though I am an Archbishop and Apostolic Nuncio. The only reason I can identify is that while Farrell’s words confirm Bergoglio’s thesis, mine refute it and demonstrate that it was not only the Bishop of Dallas who was lying.

It should also be remembered that Cardinal Wuerl, McCarrick’s successor on the chair of Washington, resigned on October 12, 2018, due to pressure from public opinion after his repeated denials of having been aware of the depraved conduct of his brother bishop. Yet in 2004 Wuerl had to handle the complaint made by Robert Ciolek, a former priest of the Diocese of Metuchen, against McCarrick, sending it to the then-Apostolic Nuncio Msgr. Gabriel Montalvo. In 2009, it was Wuerl who ordered McCarrick’s transfer from Redemptoris Mater Seminary to Saint Thomas the Apostle Parish in Washington, and in 2010 it was Wuerl himself, along with the President of the Bishops’ Conference, Cardinal Francis George, who advised the Secretariat of State against sending a congratulatory message to McCarrick on the occasion of his 80th birthday. The Report also cites the correspondence between Nuncio Sambi and Wuerl concerning the danger of scandal surrounding McCarrick’s person; the same may be said for the correspondence of Cardinal Re, the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, which confirms that Wuerl “constantly favored McCarrick even when he was not living in the seminary.” It is therefore very strange that the serious suspicions which weighed on the cardinal prior to my appointment [as Nuncio], which are amply documented in the Report, are considered grounds for censure against me – despite my having once again notified the Secretariat of State about them – but not against Wuerl, who even after his resignation as Archbishop of Washington retained his posts in the Roman Dicasteries, including the Congregation for Bishops where he retained his voice in the appointment of bishops.

It is not clear why the drafters of the Report are so casual in judging John Paul II for having put faith in his secretary’s words in defense of McCarrick, yet so absolving towards Bergoglio, despite the fact that there was a pile of dossiers concerning Uncle Ted, whom Bergoglio’s predecessor had requested to “keep a low profile.”

I believe the time has come to clarify once and for all the position of the judging body – rectius: of this judging body – with respect to the accused.

According to the law, a judge must be impartial, and in order to be such he must not have any interest or connection with the one being judged. In reality, this impartiality fails in one of the most sensational canonical processes in the history of the Church, in which the scandals and crimes alleged against the accused are of such gravity that they merited his deposition from being a cardinal and his reduction to the lay state.

— 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 absence of a true condemnation

It is necessary to emphasize the extreme mildness of the sentence inflicted on the offender, indeed one could even say its absence, since the one accused was only deprived of the clerical state with an administrative procedure from the tribunal of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, ratified as res iudicata by Bergoglio. And yet it would have been possible to give him a prison sentence, as was done for the counselor at the Nunciature in Washington who in 2018 was sentenced to five years in prison in the Vatican for the possession and dissemination of child pornography.

In truth, dismissal from the clerical state reveals the essence of that clericalism – so deplored in words – which considers the lay state almost as a punishment in itself, while it ought to be the premise for the imposition of a penal sanction. Among other things, the lack of imprisonment or at least house arrest permits McCarrick to have a total freedom of movement and action that keeps his situation unchanged. He is therefore in a position to commit new crimes and to continue to carry out his criminal activities in both the ecclesial and political spheres.

Finally, it should be remembered that the canonical process does not eliminate the criminal cases against the former cardinal which have been introduced in American courts, which strangely languish in the utmost secrecy, further demonstrating McCarrick’s political power and media influence not only in the Vatican but also in the United States.

Conflicts of interest and omissions

It is difficult to look at the “judge” of this case without considering the fact that he may find himself in a position of having a debt of gratitude towards the accused and his accomplices: that is, that he has a clear conflict of interest.

If Jorge Mario Bergoglio owes his election to the conspiracy of the so-called Saint Gallen Mafia, which included ultra-progressive cardinals in constant and assiduous relationship with McCarrick; if McCarrick’s endorsement of candidate Bergoglio found a hearing among the conclave electors and those who have the power of persuasion in the Vatican, for example the famous “Italian gentleman” whom the American cardinal referred to in a 2013 conference at Villanova University; if the resignation of Benedict XVI was in some way provoked or favored by interference from the deep church and the deep state, it is logical to suppose that Bergoglio and his collaborators did not have any intention of letting the names of McCarrick’s accomplices leak into the Report, nor the names of those who favored him in his ecclesiastical cursus honorum, nor above all the names of those who in the face of the possibility of a conviction could in some way take revenge, for example by revealing the involvement of prominent personalities of the Roman Curia, if not of Bergoglio himself.

In blatant contradiction of the claimed pretense of transparency, the Report took great care not to reveal the acts of the administrative process. It is therefore possible to ask if McCarrick’s defense may have agreed to the sentencing of his client in exchange for a ridiculously small sentence that in fact leaves the offender who committed such serious crimes in total freedom, while preventing the victims from challenging the “judge” and demanding fair compensation. Certainly, the anomaly is obvious, even to those who are not experts in the law.

The shared interests of the deep church and the deep state

In this network of complicity and blackmail, it is also possible to highlight ties of both the “judge” and the accused with politics, in particular with the American Democratic Party, with Communist China, and more generally with the globalist movements and parties. The fact that in 2004 McCarrick, who was then Archbishop of Washington, worked strenuously to prevent the dissemination of the letter of the then-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, to the bishops of the United States with regard to the ban on administering Holy Communion to politicians who support abortion, undoubtedly represents an assist to self-styled Catholic Democratic politicians, beginning with John Kerry all the way up to Joe Biden. The latter, a convinced supporter of abortion, merited the almost-unanimous support of the hierarchy, thus being able to count on the votes of an electorate that would otherwise have been destined for Trump. Strange coincidences, to be honest: on the one hand the deep state struck at the Church and Benedict XVI with the intention of electing a representative of the deep church as Pope; on the other hand the deep church struck at the State and Trump with the intention of electing a representative of the deep state as President. Let the reader judge whether the plans of the conspirators have achieved their intended purpose

This collusion with the global Left is the necessary corollary of a much larger project, in which the fifth columns of dissolution that have penetrated into the heart of the Church actively collaborate with the deep state following a single script under a single direction: the actors in this pièce [play] have different parts, but they follow the same plot on the same stage.

Analogies with the pandemic and the electoral fraud

On closer inspection, both the pandemic and the electoral fraud in the United States have disturbing similarities to the McCarrick case and to what is happening in the Church. Those who have to decide whether to confine the entire population at home or to obligate it to be vaccinated make use of unreliable detection tools, precisely because by means of these they succeed in falsifying the data, with the complicity of the mainstream media. It matters little whether the virus has a mortality rate similar to that of a seasonal flu or if the number of deceased is similar to that of preceding years: someone has decided that there simply is a pandemic and that the world economy must be demolished in order to create the premise for the Great Reset. Rational arguments, scientific evaluations, and the experience of serious scientists engaged in the care of patients are all worth nothing in the face of the script that has been imposed on the actors. The same holds true for the elections in the United States: in the face of the evidence of fraud – which is acquiring the contours of a true and proper coup d’état carried out by criminal minds – the media insist on presenting Joe Biden as the victor, and world leaders – including the Holy See – are in a hurry to acknowledge his victory, to discredit his Republican adversaries, and to present Trump as a lonely bully who is about to be abandoned by his family and even by the First Lady. It matters little that there are dozens and dozens of videos on the internet showing the irregularities committed during the counting of the votes, or that there are hundreds of testimonies of fraud: the Democrats, the media, and the entire cast repeat that Biden is President-Elect and that Trump should step aside. Because, in the kingdom of lies, if reality does not correspond to the narrative, it is reality that must be corrected and censured. Thus, millions of people in the streets to protest against the lockdown or against electoral fraud simply do not exist, because of the simple fact that the mainstream media does not show them on television and censors them on the internet, and that whatever it denounces as fake news must acritically be considered as such.

The enslavement of part of the hierarchy

It is therefore not surprising that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, followed like clockwork by Vatican News and an affectionate phone call from Bergoglio to Biden, made haste to give proof of its fidelity to the system: these ecclesiastics are intrinsically involved and must scrupulously stick to the part that has been given to them. They did the same, on the global level, by supporting Covid restrictions with the closure of the churches, ordering the suspension of the celebration of Masses and even inviting the faithful to obey the civil authorities. The Archbishop of Washington allowed himself to criticize the official visit of the First Couple to the Shrine of Saint John Paul II and expressed himself, along with other bishops and clerics, in support of BLM: such self-sacrifice for the cause merited him the cardinal’s red hat during these very days. And it is no coincidence that adherence to the globalist agenda comes from people who are fully compromised in supporting the LGBTQ movements, beginning with Cupich, Tobin, Wuerl, McElroy, and Stowe. The deafening silence of the Holy See and the world episcopate in the face of ethical problems posed by the soon-to-be-distributed vaccines, which contain cells from aborted human fetuses, is quite significant. God forbid that the speculation of the pharmaceutical companies on the pandemic also sees the deep church as the recipient of generous “donations” – as has already happened with the Agreement between China and the Vatican.

Vices and corruption find the deep church and deep state united in a cesspool of repugnant crimes, in which the defenseless and children are the victims of exploitation, violence and harassment committed by characters who at the same time promote abortion, gender ideology, and the sexual freedom of minors, including sex changes.

Illegal immigration as well – which is supported in order to destabilize nations and cancel their identities – finds support from both the Left as well as the church of Bergoglio, despite the fact that it is directly connected with the trafficking of minors, the increase of criminality and the destruction of the social fabric. Indeed, it is supported for precisely for this reason, just as there has been a desire to encourage the political crisis in the US elections, the economic crisis through the criminal manipulation of the pandemic, and possibly also religious warfare via the Islamic attacks and profanations of churches throughout Europe.

The need for an overview

It is also very disconcerting that, in this perfectly coherent framework, there are many prelates – if not almost all of them – who limit themselves to analyzing the events that affect the Catholic Church almost as if they existed only in the ecclesial sphere, as if they did not have any relation with the political and social events that are unfolding on the global level. There are bishops who formulate some timid stances in the face of Bergoglio’s words in support of the legalization of civil unions, or over the inconsistencies and falsifications that emerge in the McCarrick Report; but none of them, even if animated by good intentions, dare to denounce the evidence of the facts, namely the existence of a pactum sceleris between the deviant part of the Hierarchy – the deep church, precisely – and the deviant part of the State, of the world of finance and information. Yet it is so evident that it has been the object of analysis by numerous, mostly secular, intellectuals.

The loss of credibility

This point must be denounced loudly: the Report drawn up by the Secretariat of State is an indecent and clumsy attempt to give a semblance of credibility to a gang of perverts and corrupt men in the service of the New World Order. The surreal thing is that this operation of impudent mystification has been carried out, not by the accused, but by those who ought to judge him, and along with him they paradoxically ought to judge themselves, their brothers, their friends, and those to whom they guaranteed impunity, promotions, and careers.

The credibility of the writers of the Report may be demonstrated from its mild condemnation of a prelate organic to the system, whom Bergoglio himself sent as an interlocutor of the Holy See with the Chinese communist dictatorship, and who at the same time carried out official assignments on behalf of the U.S. State Department, frequenting the Clintons, Obamas, Bidens, and the Democrats. This credibility may also be confirmed by the fact that a corrupt homosexual, a molester of young men and children, a corrupter of clergy and seminarians, was simply deprived of the dignity of cardinal and of the clerical state without any prison sentence and without excommunicating him for the delicts with which he stained himself, including the crime of “sollicitatio ad turpia” in Confession, one of the most hateful crimes that a priest can commit. In this “process,” as summary as it was omissory, the spiritual dimension of guilt was completely absent: the guilty party was not subjected to excommunication, which is an eminently medicinal sanction ordered towards eternal salvation, nor was he exhorted to do penance, to make public amends and reparation.

An independent commission

When the Nuremberg trials were held after World War II against the crimes of Nazism, the court was presided over by a Russian judge who was charged with judging the invasion of Poland that Germany, as we know, had undertaken precisely with Russia. It seems to me that there is not much difference between this and what we see happening today in the attempt to lay responsibility for the McCarrick case on John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and the undersigned. The only one who in the narrative of the Secretariat of State cannot be touched by any suspicion, by any accusation – even if only indirect – or by any shadow of cover-up, should obviously be the Argentine.

It would seem appropriate for an independent commission to be constituted – as was already hoped for by the U.S. Bishops’ Conference in November 2018 and as was then firmly blocked by the Congregation for Bishops at the order of Bergoglio – that would investigate this case without external influences and without hiding decisive evidence. However, I doubt that the improbable hopes of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference will be heard, since among those being raised to cardinal in the upcoming consistory is the Archbishop of Washington, the executor of Santa Marta’s orders, who joins the most faithful servants Cupich and Tobin.

If light would truly be shed on the entire affair, the whole house of cards constructed in these years would collapse, and the complicity of members of the Hierarchy at the highest levels would also emerge, as well as their ties with the American Democrats and the global Left. In short, there would be confirmed what many do not yet dare admit, namely, the role played by the deep church, since the election of John XXIII, in creating the theological premises and the ecclesial climate that would allow the Church to be the servant of the New World Order and to replace the Pope with the false prophet of the Antichrist. If this has not yet completely happened, we must give thanks only to Providence.

Intellectual honesty

I imagine that the moderates – as silent today in the face of Covid as they are in deploring the electoral fraud or the farce of the McCarrick Report – are horrified at the mere mention of calling into question the Second Vatican Council. The Democrats too are horrified to hear criticism of the laws thanks to which the United States has come to see the will of the voters subverted. The self-styled health experts are horrified to see their claims contested which contrast with the scientific truth and with the epidemiological evidence. The supporters of the reception of illegal immigrants are horrified when they are shown the rate of murder, rape, violence and robbery committed by those same illegal immigrants. The supporters of the gay lobby are horrified when the criminal offenses of a predatory nature committed by clerics are shown to involve a very high percentage of homosexuals. In this general tearing of garments, I would like to recall that it would be enough to have a little intellectual honesty and a little critical judgment to look the evidence in the face, even if it is painful.

The link between heresy and sodomy

This intrinsic link between doctrinal deviation and moral deviation emerged clearly on the occasion of the head-on clash with those covering up the McCarrick case: the people involved are almost always the same, with the same vices against faith and morals. They defend, cover for, and promote each other, because they are part of a true and proper “lobby,” understood as a group holding power that is capable of influencing the activity of the legislator and the decisions of the government or the other administrative organs to their own advantage.

In the ecclesiastical field, this lobby works to cancel the moral condemnation of sodomy, and it does so first of all for its own advantage, since it is primarily composed of sodomites. It adapts to the political agenda in legitimizing the demands of the LGBTQ movements, promoted by politicians who are no less given over to vice. And the role played by the Catholic Church in recent decades is also evident – or better said, by its morally and doctrinally deviant part – in opening the Overton window on homosexuality, in such a way that the sin against nature that the Church has always condemned was somehow disavowed from the evidence of the increasingly emergent scandals. If forty years ago it was horrifying to learn about a priest molesting a little boy, for some years now the news has been informing us of the raid of the Vatican Gendarmerie in the apartment of the secretary of Cardinal Coccopalmiero in the palace of the Holy Office, where a party was being held by clergy with drugs and prostitutes. From here it will be a relatively small step to legitimizing pedophilia, as certain politicians would like: the premises made by the theorization of the alleged “sexual rights” of minors, the imposition of sexual education in primary schools at the recommendation of the United Nations, and the attempts to pass legislation in Parliaments to lower the age of consent are all heading in the same direction. Some naive person – assuming that it is still possible to speak of naivety – will say that the Church will never be able to say that she is in favor of the corruption of children, because this would contradict the uninterrupted Catholic Magisterium. I limit myself to recalling what was said only a few years ago with regard to so-called homosexual “matrimony” – or about the ordination of women, ecclesiastical celibacy, or the abolition of the death penalty – and that which vice-versa is affirmed with impunity today, to the world’s applause.

The McCarrick “Line”

What should be noted in the Report is not so much what it contains as what it is silent about and what it hides under a mountain of documents and testimonies, no matter how horrifying they may be. Many journalists and many ecclesiastics were aware of the scandalous life of the “man with the red hat,” but nevertheless considered him Machiavellianly useful to the interests of the Democratic Party expression of the deep state and the progressive Catholic expression of the deep church. As the Washingtonian wrote in 2004: “With a controversial Catholic in the presidential race [John Kerry], the cardinal is seen by many as the Vatican’s man in Washington – and he may play a big role in the selection of the next pope” (here). A role McCarrick proudly claimed in the address he gave on October 11, 2013, at Villanova University, and that today, with Cardinal Farrell raised by Bergoglio’s appointment to Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, could be realized once again. Given the relationships of loyalty that are consolidated between the members of the “lavender mafia,” it is at least reasonable to think that McCarrick is still able to intervene in the election of the Pope, not only thanks to his network of friends and accomplices, some of whom are cardinals electors, but also by playing an active role in the procedures of the conclave and its preparation.

Would we be surprised if, after noting the electoral fraud in the presidential election in the United States, “someone” would even try to manipulate the election of the Supreme Pontiff? Let us not forget that, as has already been noted by several parties, on the fourth vote of the second day of the last conclave an irregularity emerged in the counting of the ballots, which was remedied by a new vote, in derogation from the provisions of the Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis promulgated by John Paul II in 1996.

It is however significant that, while on the one hand McCarrick is now ousted from his functions and resides in a secret locality (where he can continue undisturbed in his para-diplomatic activity on behalf of the deep state and the deep church in the anonymous guise of a layman), on the other hand all those who have made a career in the Church thanks to McCarrick are still in their places and have even been promoted: all people whom he favored because of a common lifestyle and common intentions; all blackmailable and blackmailers because of the secrets which they have come to know thanks to their position; all of them ready to pull out names and circumstances and dates if anyone dares to touch them. Some could still be forced to obey Mr. McCarrick, if he can keep them under blackmail or bribe them with the huge money at his disposal, even now that he is no longer a prince of the Church.

The “line” which this cardinal began is today capable – as we see – of interfering and working in the life of the Church and society, with the advantage of having discharged the sins of the entire “lavender mafia” onto a convenient scapegoat and to be able to appear today as if it is a stranger to allegations of abuse. But it is enough to walk through the gates of the Porta Angelica to come across unpresentable characters, some of whom have been called to the Vatican to save them from investigations that were pending on them abroad; others are even regulars at Santa Marta or perform managerial duties there, consolidating the network of connivances and complicities under the indulgent eyes of the Prince. On the other hand, the emphasis on Bergoglio’s moralizing role smashes against the crude reality that nothing has ever really changed behind the high Leonine Wall, given the protection enjoyed by, among others, Peña Parra and Zanchetta.

The failure to condemn sodomy

Some commentators have rightly highlighted a disheartening fact: the crimes for which McCarrick was summoned to judgment only concern the abuse of minors, while his unnatural relationships with consenting adults are quietly accepted and tolerated, as if the immoral and sacrilegious acts of a cleric are not to be deplored, but rather only his imprudence in not having known how to keep them within the secrecy of the home. This too will have to be accounted for by those responsible, above all in consideration of Bergoglio’s increasingly clear will to apply a laxist pastoral approach – according to the tested method of Amoris Laetitia – in derogation of the moral condemnation of sodomy.

The guilty and the victims of the scandals

The paradoxical thing that emerges from the scandals of the clergy is that the latest concern of Bergoglio’s magic circle is to give justice to the victims, not only by compensating them (which, moreover, is not done by the perpetrators but by the dioceses, using the goods donated by the faithful) but also by punishing those responsible in an exemplary way. There ought to be punishment not only for delicts recognized as penal crimes by the laws of the State, but also for moral delicts, by which adults have been led into grave sin by sacred ministers. Who will heal the wounds of the soul, the stains on the purity of so many youth, including also seminarians and priests? By contrast, it appears that those who have been discovered and exposed to public execration consider themselves to be true victims: they feel they have been hindered in their interests, their trafficking, and their intrigues. Meanwhile, those who have denounced scandals, who ask for justice and truth, are considered guilty, beginning with priests who are transferred or deprived of the care of souls because they have dared to inform their bishop of the perversions of one of their brothers.

The holy church is the victim of the crimes of her ministers

But there is another completely innocent victim of these scandals: the Holy Church. The image of the Spouse of Christ has been tarnished, humiliated and discredited, because those who committed these crimes acted by exploiting the trust placed in the dress which they wear, using their own role as priest or prelate to ensnare and corrupt souls. The ones responsible for this discrediting of the Church include also those in the Vatican, in dioceses, in convents, in Catholic schools and in religious organizations – we think, for example, of the Boy Scouts – who did not eradicate this scourge in the bud but even hid it and denied it. By now it is evident that this invasion of homosexuals and perverts was planned and intended: it was not a fortuitous event that occurred only due to the omission of controls, but rather a precise plan of systematic infiltration of the Church in order to demolish it from within. And those to whom the Lord has entrusted the governance of His Spouse will have to answer to Him for this.

In all of this, however, our adversaries forget that the Church is not a faceless collection of persons without faces who blindly obey mercenaries, but rather a Living Body with a Divine Head: Our Lord Jesus Christ. To think of being able to kill the Spouse of Christ without the Spouse intervening is a delusion that only Satan could believe possible. Indeed, he will come to realize that precisely in crucifying her, in covering her with spit and lashes of the whip just as the Savior was crucified two thousand years ago, he is signing his own definitive defeat. O mors, ero mors tua: morsus tuus ero, inferne [O death, I will be your death: Hell, I shall be your sting].

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

November 21, 2020

Presentation of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary


  carlo maria viganò, catholic, coronavirus, deep church, deep state, homosexuality, lgbt tyranny, mccarrick report, sodomy, theodore mccarrick, voter fraud

Blogs

Pope Francis lashes out at lockdown protestors: they’d never protest children lacking water

Just days ago, the pope was visiting with professional basketball players while breaking social distancing guidelines and not wearing a mask.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 5:22 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a rant by Pope Francis where he lets down his guard and allows his leftist colors to show more than in the past, the Pope said of anti-lockdown protestors, “you’ll never find such people protesting the death of George Floyd, or joining a demonstration because there are shantytowns where children lack water or education, or because there are whole families who have lost their income.”

His comments come in a teaser for the Pope’s new book-length interview with leftist Vatican journalist Austen Ivereigh.

In it, the pope lashes out at anti-lockdown protestors, saying, “those who claim, for example, that being forced to wear a mask is an unwarranted imposition by the state.” He calls them, “victims only in their own imagination.”

But with all the virtue-signaling painfully evident in the book, Pope Francis himself is not all that concerned about mask-wearing in his own house, nor at large gatherings. Just yesterday, in the Vatican, he met with NBA players and officials from the National Basketball Players Association. The meeting took place indoors, without masks, and also without social distancing.

The Pope apparently requested the meeting in which they discussed the NBA’s efforts to promote racial equality and social justice. The NBA had painted “Black Lives Matter” on the court along their sideline, and donned “Equality” and other sayings on their jerseys.

Despite the frustration this outburst from Pope Francis may cause, it is in reality much less disturbing and harmful than the doctrinal errors he has put forward, such as those on divorced and remarried Catholics, on homosexual civil unions, on transgendered couples, on the Abu Dhabi statement, on cohabitation, and on so much more.

So, even though we may be tempted to anger, let’s offer up any feelings of frustration and let us rather pray earnestly for the Pope’s conversion. Yes, ‘conversion.’ Remember, that was Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s advice – to pray for the conversion of Pope Francis. And Bishop Schneider also gave us the best remedy to the Pope’s doctrinal confusion when he released his ‘declaration of truths’ with Cardinal Raymond Burke.


Blogs

Ralph Martin, renowned author, explains steps needed to fix ‘terrible’ situation in the Church

The Church is in need of 'some pretty deep repentance,' he said on The John-Henry Westen Show.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 3:50 pm EST
Featured Image
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In my latest episode of The John-Henry Westen Show, I was joined by accomplished author and seminary professor Dr. Ralph Martin, the head of Renewal Ministries, an organization dedicated to Catholic evangelization, to discuss his book,“A Church in Crisis: Pathways Forward.”

Never one to mince words, Dr. Martin told me we have “a terrible situation right now” in the Church, and that “as long as we keep that false optimism going, we're not going to be able to really look at what's wrong and really come up with measures that would address the depth of our problems.” 

It was a pleasure to discuss with Dr. Martin the array of topics included in his book, especially what he thinks are the causes that have led to the crisis in the Church...and what he thinks can help us get out of this mess. You can purchase his book from Emmaus Road Publishing by clicking here

Dr. Martin explained that he wanted to write a book that was “honest about the confusion because a lot of people try to paper it over and say, oh, no, it's the media who's distorting things.” 

“The media does distort things,” he said, “but things are happening that are objectively just really, really wrong.” 

“We’ve got to be willing to speak the truth and take the consequences,” he continued. “The longer we delay in speaking the truth, the worse it's going to get.” 

Dr. Martin and I also discussed Pope Francis. 

“Those around the pope and the pope [himself] want to deemphasize sexual morality … probably out of good motives, but [it is] really a bad thing to do.”  

“Catholics who are coming to church on Sunday sometimes aren't coming with … the spirit of God,” he added. “They're coming with the mind of the world and the spirit of the age.” 

Dr. Martin gave a brutally honest appraisal of what’s going on in the church today. “We don't have a vibrant, thriving church at all … we need some pretty deep repentance.”  

“We’ve got to be honest. We've got to get over this false optimism.”

Dr. Martin recommended that Catholics take their prayer lives more seriously and that they use their voices to speak up when they see something that’s not quite right at their parish. 

“Us laypeople shouldn't be passive ... Vatican II does say that laypeople have a right to make their views known.” 

“We need to vote with our pocketbooks … to support those parishes and those diocese that are faithful to Christ.” 

He closed our interview by noting that, “the Lord’s permitting [this crisis] to come out so that the righteous can be vindicated, that true doctrine can be confirmed, and that those who persist in subverting the faith can be identified and we can have a purified 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].

Subscribe

* indicates required

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

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

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


  catholic church, crisis in the church, pope francis, ralph martin, the john-henry westen show

Blogs

Faithful trustee standing up to LGBTQ attack exposes rot in Toronto Catholic school board

The sorry, sordid mess of dissent that is the Toronto Catholic District School Board would not have been so clearly exposed had it not been for trustee Michael Del Grande.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 1:44 pm EST
Featured Image
Michael del Grande Toronto Catholic School Board
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne
By Lianne Laurence

TORONTO, November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — For those who witnessed the extraordinary implosion of the Toronto Catholic District School Board (TCDSB) over the last two weeks, it’s hard to decide which incident most exposed the jaw-dropping scope of the dissent of some trustees.

Was it when three of them stopped a delegate from reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church’s section on homosexuality, because, according to Trustee Di Pasquale, this was “treading in dangerous waters”? (To be fair, Di Pasquale later retracted his statement, but more on that later.)

Was it the spectacle of a number of them obsequiously accepting a lecture on how to run a Catholic board from Ontario former Premier and lesbian Kathleen Wynne during her recent delegation, and seeking her advice on how to do better by the LGBTQ community?

Or was it when trustee Ida Li Preti appeared almost to choke on the words when asked to add “through a Catholic lens” to her proposal that trustees receive “sensitivity training” to counteract the “LGBTQ systemic homophobia within the board.”

“What is ‘a Catholic lens’ when you’re talking about LGBTQ and systemic homophobia?” she asked. “The question doesn’t make sense to me.”

Indeed.

But what is beyond doubt is that the sorry, sordid mess of dissent that is the TCDSB would not have been so clearly exposed had it not been for trustee Michael Del Grande.

Or, more accurately, had it not been for his notorious motion of November 7, 2019 — and the fact that he did not retract it despite a year-long attack by LGBTQ activists and their media and board allies.

The motion behind the commotion

The affair of the motion is well known, but to briefly recap: Del Grande tabled it the night eight trustees voted to add the terms “family status and marital status” and “gender identity” and “gender expression” to the board’s code of conduct as prohibited grounds for discrimination.

Del Grande’s motion asked the board to study a number of other categories of aberrant sexual behavior, such as pedophilia, bestiality, cannibalism and vampirism, to decide whether these too, should be protected under to the code.

He was vilified by the media, particularly the obliging Toronto Star, eager recipient of leaked confidential board documents, and 15 code of conduct complaints were launched against him.

However, following an external investigation, the board voted to clear Del Grande of those complaints in August, whereupon LGBTQ activists, and their board allies renewed their campaign, recruiting Wynne and Education Minister Stephen Lecce, to their cause.

As a result, on November 11, eight trustees voted to revisit the complaints, found Del Grande guilty, and imposed sanctions. He’s now retained a lawyer (more on that later).

But in their cruel zeal to destroy Del Grande, the trustees ideologically in lockstep with the LGBTQ agenda — Maria Rizzo, Markus de Domenico, Ida Li Preti, Norm Di Pasquale — as well as those who meekly follow them — Joe Martino, Daniel Di Giorgio, Frank D’Amico and Angela Kennedy — have removed any doubts as to who they really are.

And that is: Catholic trustees who are fundamentally incapable of even comprehending, let alone fulfilling, their oath of fidelity to defend the constitutional rights of Catholic schools to teach the Catholic faith — either because they don’t believe in the Catholic faith, or they don’t think it expedient to defend it.

What was Del Grande thinking?

In light of these events, it’s worth revisiting Del Grande’s motion, which admittedly has been slightly problematic for some, including me. Sure, I laughed when I first heard it, but immediately thought: “Good grief. What on earth was he thinking?”

And I wasn’t alone: I heard similar concerns from others in the months following. One described Del Grande as “burning down the house,” and another predicted the LGBTQ lobby would not relent until they had ground his bones to make their bread.

— 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

Now, however, seeing what Del Grande and his motion have wrought, I’ve revised that opinion, and offer a couple of observations, none of which is original.

I still don’t know what Del Grande was thinking, because I haven’t asked him, but it appears that the operative word is “thinking.”

Del Grande is a veteran politician whose skill and competence is beyond question: He was a Toronto city counsellor for 11 years, three as budget chief for the late Mayor Rob Ford. He has a Master’s in Theological Studies, and was previously TCDSB trustee from 1994 to 2003, and as St. Aidan’s parishioner, oversaw the building of its new church, with the debt paid off in four years.

So he can be described as “old school” in the best possible sense of the term: someone who maintains a high standard of integrity in discharging his duties, has an expectation of certain civility in debate, and assumes others will conduct themselves in the same way.

It is therefore possible that Del Grande believed people would recognize his motion was hyperbolic, or “slippery slope,” or reductio ad absurdum, essentially an appeal to reason, and that they would actually think about the point he was trying to make, and not become offended, or inflamed, or interpret it in the worst possible light.

Alas, in the days of identity politics, the greatest characteristic of which is the almost complete obliteration of the crucial distinction “love the sinner, hate the sin,” the latter is exactly what happened.

So attempts to explain his motion as logical have proven futile, making it more obvious than what is really at stake.

Who believes in the Catholic faith?

When American Catholic novelist Flannery O’Connor was asked why she created grotesque characters, she replied: “When you can assume that your audience holds the same beliefs you do, you can relax and use more normal means of talking to it; when you have to assume that it does not, then you have to make your vision apparent by shock — to the hard of hearing you shout, and for the almost-blind you draw large and startling figures.”

While Del Grande is not dealing in fiction, he is dealing with an audience which does not believe what he does, that is, the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.

Analogous to pictures of aborted babies that provoke wrath in those who want to hide what abortion really is, his motion clearly provoked the wrath of those who want to hide the behaviors to which the LGBTQ acronym refers.

These are behaviors that, according to Catholic teaching, if not repented of, could lead to the loss of one’s immortal soul.

Again, to make the critical distinction between sinner and sin that often evokes derision: Holy Mother Church loves the homosexual person, created in the image and likeness of God and destined for eternal happiness with Him.

And that is precisely why She calls to repentance those who fall into the sin of sodomy — a sin that calls to God for vengeance.

As for gender ideology, while the Toronto archdiocese recognized, after the fact, that the board voted to amend its code of conduct to include the terms “gender identity” and “gender expression” it also pointed out: “We do not accept the view of the human person which underlies this terminology since that view is not compatible with our faith.”

In a meditation on the way of the cross, Pope Benedict noted that Christ’s words to the women of Jerusalem were a warning against the temptation — perhaps the greatest of our age — to indulge in “sentimental piety” and to “trivialize the mystery of evil.”

Enter Cardinal Collins

Along those lines, Cardinal Thomas Collins noted in a private letter to the trustees rebuking them for censoring the Catechism: “If Jesus Himself were to attend a meeting of the Toronto Catholic District School Board, I wonder if He would be interrupted, if He were to begin to say: ‘Repent, for the Kingdom of God is near,’ or many other things He says in the Gospel, because those words are perhaps not sufficiently soothing, and perhaps might offend.”

Notably, Collins did not ask the trustees in question to shape up or ship out, nor did he, in all the long year during which Del Grande was under attack, come to the embattled trustee’s defense.

That was left to Campaign Life Coalition, Canada’s national pro-life, pro-family political lobbying group, which is to be highly commended for its staunch support of Del Grande, including creating a crowdfunding page on WonderWe, Stand with Michael Del Grande, to bankroll his legal challenge.

Joe Volpe, editor of Corriere Canadese, Canada’s only Italian-language daily print newspaper, is also to be commended for exposing and excoriating the appalling conduct of the trustees gunning for Del Grande.

In the wake of the cardinal’s letter, both Martino and Di Pasquale apologized, but as Volpe, a longtime TCDSB-watcher noted in regard to the latter: “We’re beyond a stupid, self-serving apology by somebody who is less than contrite and over the top in his abuse of Catholics.”

Also in the wake of the Catechism incident, Campaign Life took the remarkable step of urging Catholics in the Toronto archdiocese to withhold their Sunday offering and contribute instead to Del Grande’s defense fund.

Whatever one thinks of this strategy, shortly afterward Cardinal Collins sent his private but widely leaked rebuke to the trustees. However, because the cardinal did not ask the dissenting trustees to resign, Campaign Life is holding to its advice that Catholics withhold their Sunday tithe.

“The Cardinal Archbishop has the moral and legal authority to right this sinking ship that is the TCDSB. And because he has a love for souls, that’s what His Eminence will surely do. He must remove the wolves from amongst the sheep,” wrote Campaign Life president Jeff Gunnarson in an email to supporters.

But whatever happens next, faithful Catholics owe Del Grande a debt of gratitude and more, particularly as this long attack has taken a terrible toll on him.

Del Grande needs our donations to his legal defense fund, our letters to Cardinal Collins and his fellow trustees on his behalf, and of course, our prayers — which we would do well to offer for all the TCDSB trustees, particularly the pro-LGBTQ faction who, tragically, fit the description of those who, in the words of Psalm 37, “lie wait for the righteous, intent on putting them to death.”

To Del Grande, the author of the psalm offers this consolation: “The salvation of the righteous comes from the Lord; he is their stronghold in time of trouble. The Lord helps them and delivers them; he delivers them from the wicked and saves them, because they take refuge in him.”

Onward, Christian soldier.

To contribute to the Michael Del Grande Defense Fund, go here.

Concerned Catholics are also urged to contact the following persons to respectfully express their views:

Cardinal Thomas Collins
Archdiocese of Toronto
1155 Yonge Street
Toronto, ON, M4T 1W2
Phone:416-934-0606, ext. 609
Email: [email protected]

TCDSB trustees:

Joseph Martino, Chair
Ward 1: Etobicoke
Phone: 416-512-3401
Email: [email protected]

Markus de Domenico
Ward 2: Etobicoke
Phone: 416-512-3402
Email: [email protected]

Ida Li Preti
Ward 3: North York
Phone: 416-512-3403
Email: [email protected]

Teresa Lubinski
Ward 4: Parkdale-High Park, Etobicoke-Lakeshore
Phone: 416-512-3404
Email: [email protected]

Maria Rizzo
Ward 5: North York
Phone: 416-512-3405
Email: [email protected]

Frank D'Amico
Ward 6: York
Phone: 416-512-3406
Email: [email protected]

Michael Del Grande
Ward 7: Scarborough/ North York
Phone: 416-512-3407
Email: [email protected]

Garry Tanuan
Ward 8: Scarborough
Phone: 416-512-3408
Email: [email protected]

Norm Di Pasquale
Ward 9: Toronto
Phone: 416-512-3409
Email: [email protected]

Daniel Di Giorgio
Ward 10: Toronto
Phone: 416-512-3410
Email: [email protected]

Angela Kennedy
Ward 11: East York/Toronto
Phone: 416-512-3411
Email: [email protected]

Nancy Crawford
Ward 12: Scarborough
Phone: 416-512-3412
Email: [email protected]


  michael del grande, mike del grande, thomas collins, toronto catholic district school board

Blogs

McCarrick Report details history of Pope Benedict XVI’s lenient treatment of the case

In hindsight, it might have been better for the Catholic Church had Pope Benedict done what Archbishop Viganò had proposed in 2008 — a canonical investigation.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:55 pm EST
Featured Image
Pope Benedict XVI Franco Origlia / Getty Images
Maike Hickson Maike Hickson Follow Maike
By Maike Hickson

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The new November 10 McCarrick Report reveals in detail the content of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s 2006 and 2008 memoranda concerning McCarrick’s immoral conduct, one of which was asking Pope Benedict XVI to start a canonical investigation of this prelate. With it, the Report confirms important details of Viganò’s own 2018 testimony, but gives us, at the same time, the new fact that these two Viganò memoranda did reach his superiors who then discussed them with the Holy Father and encouraged him to take some clear action with regard to McCarrick. Unfortunately, however, Pope Benedict chose not to open up a canonical investigation that would have likely put an end to some of the waffling of the Vatican with regard to the U.S. cardinal, never being sure what are the rumors and what are the facts.

As LifeSite already reported, the newly released McCarrick Report seems to try to steer away from criticism of Pope Francis and to point to faults or omissions committed both by Pope John Paul II — who was aware of allegations against McCarrick but who chose to trust McCarrick’s protestation of innocence and the testimony of three U.S. bishops that later turned out to have been false — and by Pope Benedict XVI. Francis, on the contrary, is presented as simply having followed his predecessors’ rules with regard to McCarrick, as if he had not had his own moral duty to look into the situation himself. For example, Francis is quoted as saying that he trusted the “morally strict” Pope John Paul II in his approach to McCarrick.

However, just because the McCarrick report tries to steer the discussion into one direction, away from Pope Francis’ own responsibility (we have shown that here), it does not mean that we should not consider the facts laid out therein with regard to the other earlier popes. There is one fact that stands in the room: from the time of John Paul II onward, the Vatican had multiple reports about McCarrick that as a bishop he did, indeed, share beds with his subordinate priests and seminarians. Even if there was doubt about any possible sexual contacts in these cases, would it not have warranted a strong response on the part of the Vatican by virtue of the simple fact that an adult man who was in a superior position shared the beds with other adult men who were his subordinates? Should this not have been sufficient to remove McCarrick from any episcopal office?

In this report, we will look at the time period of 2005 until 2013/2014, the time of Benedict’s resignation and Francis’ election, including the beginning of his pontificate. On November 22, prior to publication, LifeSite sent this report to Pope Benedict, via his personal secretary Archbishop Georg Gänswein, asking for a comment and any potential correction of the facts. We shall update this report if we still hear from him.

As we will show, from 2005 onward, Pope Benedict XVI first decided to retire the already-75-year-old cardinal from the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., after an increased number of testimonies, rumors, articles, and other forms of reports on McCarrick’s immoral behavior. Then, in 2006 and 2008, he approved Vatican cardinals telling McCarrick to lead a private life. But at the same time, the Pope never chose to undertake a canonical investigation of all those swirling allegations against the cardinal. Strikingly, U.S. journalist Richard Sipe had written an Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI in May of 2008, offering to provide him with evidence that McCarrick was a homosexual predator, but that evidence was never requested by the Pope nor by his collaborators. For the sake of doing justice to Pope Benedict, we will present the developments under his pontificate in detail, asking our readers for some patience.

LifeSite had already reported about the pontificate of Pope John Paul II and how he had received, in 1999, a concerned letter from Cardinal John O’Connor, in which he wrote about stories from “absolutely impeccable authorities” that McCarrick had shared his bed with male visitors at home and with seminarians at a beach house. However, this fact — even confirmed by McCarrick himself — had not sufficed to stop McCarrick’s career in the Church, and in 2000, he was made the archbishop of Washington, D.C., after John Paul II had received some supportive statements by three U.S. bishops that now turn out to have been deceptive.

2005

In light of later developments in 2005 — especially since a priest came forward accusing McCarrick — it was Pope Benedict who finally decided that McCarrick should retire, even though he had originally decided, in June of that year, that the cardinal should remain in his office for two more years after he had then turned 75 years of age.

According to the McCarrick Report, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re — the then-Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops – stated in a handwritten memorandum dated November 5, 2005: “The Holy Father requests that the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops convoke Cardinal McCarrick to Rome, to ask him to spontaneously withdraw immediately from the Washington See after the Christmas holidays.”

At the time, in 2005, Pope Benedict had received information from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that one priest from the Diocese of Metuchen who accused McCarrick of misdeeds was deemed credible. Cardinal Re wrote on November 7 of that year: “Unfortunately, new rumors have come from Metuchen that lead one to hold to be true those [rumors] of years ago that had been judged false.” Allegations of McCarrick’s having shared a bed with another priest had also come to the public light, in December of 2005, due to an article written by U.S. journalist Matt Abbott.

Pope Benedict commented on these developments in 2005 for the McCarrick report, and here we quote the report at length:

In an interview, Cardinal Re stated, “I spoke to Benedict XVI about the problem with McCarrick and he immediately approved the process for the appointment of a successor.”

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who reviewed the Report related to these events, found the contents to be consistent with his own recollections. Through Archbishop Georg Gänswein, the Pope Emeritus recalled that there were suspicions regarding McCarrick’s prior misconduct but a dearth of concrete evidence. The Pope Emeritus recollected that the request that McCarrick resign as Archbishop of Washington was intended to send McCarrick a “clear signal” of disapproval.

However, one may ask: If there was a “dearth of evidence” and “suspicions,” was it not time for a proper investigation of these accusations, that is to say, time for a canonical investigation, for the sake of many souls involved? Instead, the Pope chose to retire McCarrick at the age of 75, as a “clear signal” of approval.

Cardinal Re, in comments for the McCarrick Report, said that at the time the information received by the Congregation for Bishops “was neither ‘certain’ nor ‘concrete’ with respect to McCarrick’s misconduct.” He also emphasized that the information “did not relate to minors,” and that, if “there had been any involvement of minors, the approach to the question would have been completely different.”

This might indicate another problem that the Church suffered under for too long, also under Pope Benedict’s pontificate, namely that homosexual contacts between adult priests were regarded as a lesser problem. As another example, we could mention here that Pope Benedict chose not to start a canonical investigation of a monsignor who worked closely with him as Pope in the Vatican, after there emerged in 2006 complaints about his homosexual assaults on other priests, especially one for whom Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò wrote at the time a memorandum, summing up problems with that monsignor. Instead, Benedict chose to send this monsignor away from Rome, to another position in Austria and, then, after renewed complaints, to his home diocese in Germany.

2006

It was to take another half a year until McCarrick was finally retired. States the report: “On 16 May 2006, Pope Benedict XVI accepted McCarrick’s resignation as Archbishop of Washington and appointed him as the Apostolic Administrator of the Archdiocese for one month.”

2006 is also when more information about the legal complaints of a priest came to light via official legal letters — McCarrick had forced himself upon him in the 1980s. At the time, an official of the nunciature in Washington expressed that it might be “impossible to prevent an eventual leak of the accusation,” whether it be true or not. Therefore, Cardinal Re stated in a letter to Washington Nuncio Archbishop Pietro Sambi on October 17, 2006 that “as it is impossible to exclude the risk that the press may speak of this in the near or distant future,” McCarrick should be advised to move away from the seminary he was dwelling in at the time. Re also said that McCarrick “needs to decide to lead a reserved life of prayer, so as to not cause himself to be spoken of.”

This October 17, 2006 note is an important historic document, because it lays out the “instructions” given to McCarrick which were not even canonical sanctions. McCarrick was essentially told to lay low so as not to draw the media attention to himself, which could trigger reports of allegations about him. At this moment, it seems that the Church’s concern was more about the reputation of the person and institution involved, rather than about finding out the facts and taking fitting actions.

It is at this point of history that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò comes in. In 2006 and then in 2008, he wrote two memoranda about the McCarrick case. LifeSite has been able to receive directly from Viganò a confirmation of the accuracy of both Viganò memoranda, and we reproduce them below.

At the time the Delegate for Pontifical Representations within the Secretariat of State, Viganò commented on a correspondence between Nuncio Sambi and Cardinal Bertone on the instructions to be given to McCarrick. Nuncio Sambi had written to Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone on November 27, 2006, stating, “While everyone recognizes Cardinal McCarrick’s warmth, skill, and political flair, he nevertheless keeps us all on edge for the possibility that he may be involved in sex scandals at any moment.”

On December 6, 2006, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò wrote a memorandum (see full text here) related to the November 2006 communication from Nuncio Sambi to Cardinal Bertone. His memorandum summed up what the Vatican so far had heard from different sources, among them Father Boniface Ramsey, O.P. who told the Vatican in 2000 about McCarrick’s sharing the bed with seminarians and priests, as well as the above-mentioned priest who accused McCarrick of abuse. Viganò commented on the priest’s accusations that they are “of such gravity and are so nefarious as to provoke in the reader a sense of disconcert, deep sorrow, and bitterness.” The Italian prelate then pointed out that in the case of a cardinal, it is the Pope’s to judge, and that it would be “healthy,” if “for once” the “ecclesiastical authorities were to intervene before the civil authorities.” Viganò at the time proposed “an exemplary measure that might have a medicinal function that would soothe the serious scandal for the faithful.”

It seems that Viganò'’ memorandum had some effect: “Viganò’s memorandum was read first by Archbishop Leonardo Sandri, the Substitute, followed by Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone. Archbishop Sandri wrote and signed in his hand on the Viganò memorandum, “Si vera sunt exposita: The least one can imagine would be a prohibition against any public pastoral activity, guiding him towards a retired life of penance and prayer. But would that be sufficient?” As the McCarrick report continues, “Cardinal Bertone, agreeing that the matter was disturbing and recognizing that primary competence rested with the Congregation for Bishops, contacted Prefect Re. Following a telephone call with Cardinal Re, the Secretary of State noted in his own hand on the same memorandum: ‘Cardinal Re will write to the Nuncio for a discreet intervention.’”

Nuncio Sambi then had a December 15, 2006 meeting with McCarrick where the Nuncio explained to McCarrick that “no one believes in the truth of the accusations, but in the USA today to create a scandal involving a cardinal and one that damages the Church, the truthfulness of the facts is not indispensable.”

Pope Benedict XVI was also directly informed and he approved of the measures.

2007

Cardinal Bertone’s itemized agenda for his audience with Pope Benedict XVI at the time showed that he and Pope Benedict XVI discussed “Problems relating to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick” during their weekly meeting on 15 January 2007. Cardinal Bertone recalled in an interview for the McCarrick report that he had briefed Pope Benedict XVI regarding the McCarrick situation.

But here comes the Pope’s own assessment of the situation, which seems today so misplaced.

States the report: “Cardinal Bertone stated that the Holy Father ‘was worried about McCarrick’ and wished that McCarrick’s activities be contained in some manner, but did not believe that the path of formal investigation by [the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] should be taken at that point. Consistent with this recollection, nothing in the record indicates that Pope Benedict XVI instructed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to open an investigation or expressed the view that the course of action previously adopted by Cardinal Re and the Congregation for Bishops should be modified.”

The lack of decisiveness on the Pope’s part is also clarified in light of the fact that in August 2007, he selected McCarrick to serve as special papal envoy to the Seventh Symposium of the Religion, Science and the Environment Movement, which was held the following month in Greenland. McCarrick even read Pope Benedict XVI’s greeting out loud at the beginning of the program in Greenland.

The inherent contradiction is clear: While, with papal approval, McCarrick is first told to lead a private life and not to appear much in public, the Pope himself then calls McCarrick into a public role by even allowing him to present his greeting to an audience in Greenland. The Pope even mentioned McCarrick by name in his greeting.

One could have the following consideration. In a sense, this waffling on the part of Rome was doing injustice either to McCarrick or to his victims. That is to say, had McCarrick been innocent, this quietly telling him to lay low was an injustice to him and he would have deserved a strong defense of his Church. But had he been guilty, the victims deserved that he was stopped from doing harm and punished for his past sins. Either way, the situation would have called for a thorough investigation of the allegations against McCarrick, just as Viganò was to ask for in 2008.

2008

In line with this lack of papal decisiveness, McCarrick’s own activities and responsibilities only slightly decreased in early 2007 following his retirement and the verbal indications received from Cardinal Re through Nuncio Sambi. Nevertheless, Cardinal McCarrick was active during the rest of the year and in 2008, both in the United States and overseas. For example, he attended World Youth Day celebrations in Sydney, Australia, in July 2008, where he was one of the cardinals greeted by the Holy Father.

Another factor of the McCarrick situation and its lack of firm clarity was that Benedict did not explicitly call upon someone to supervise the situation with the U.S. cardinal and to continue to report back to him. As the McCarrick report states: “While McCarrick’s continued activities were known to Nuncio Sambi and certain officials in the Secretariat of State, it appears that Cardinal Re remained under the impression during this period that McCarrick had generally ceased his overseas travel in line with the verbal indications McCarrick had received from Sambi in 2006.”

How can it be that the Vatican establishes rules for a potential culprit, but then does not consistently supervise him to see that he remains loyal to these instructions?

McCarrick also appeared in public together with Pope Benedict in April 2008, at the time of the papal trip to the United States. During that trip, McCarrick concelebrated Mass with Pope Benedict XVI at St. Patrick’s Cathedral and attended dinner with the Holy Father during the visit to New York. Had Benedict been insistent and consistent with the rule that McCarrick should lead a quiet life away from the public, this incident certainly would not have taken place. In a sense, the Vatican acted here like a liberal parent: it told a child not to do certain things but then did not make sure these rules were supervised and implemented.

But it was at that time — April of 2008 — that another public reminder came that the McCarrick problem still had not been solved: shortly after Benedict’s return from the United States, Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and former Benedictine monk, published on the Internet an Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI about the “Pattern of the Sexual Abuse Crisis in the United States.” One of the cases therein mentioned was McCarrick.

In his letter, Sipe wrote that “McCarrick took seminarians and young priests to a shore home in New Jersey, sites in New York, and other places and slept with some of them. He established a coterie of young seminarians and priests that he encouraged to call him ‘Uncle Ted.’” Sipe added that he had “documents and letters I have received from a priest who describes in detail McCarrick’s sexual advances and personal activity” and then explains that “I know the names of at least four priests who have had sexual encounters with Cardinal McCarrick. I have documents and letters that record the first hand testimony and eye witness accounts of McCarrick.” Such a published letter, it would seem, would call for an investigation on the part of the Vatican.

In contradiction to what Cardinal Re had told the authors of the McCarrick Report — namely, that he thought McCarrick’s activities had calmed down and that he abided by the instructions — he did, after Sipe’s article, reach out on May 8 to Nuncio Sambi, asking him to “follow closely the Cardinal McCarrick case, and also to let me know if it is agreed that I should repeat the indications” that he himself had originally transmitted to the Nuncio in his 17 October 2006 letter.

In light of these allegations published by Sipe, Archbishop Viganò saw fit once more to intervene. He wrote on May 5, 2008 a second internal memorandum related to McCarrick (see full text here). Archbishop Viganò’s 2008 memorandum, which contained, in part, some content similar to his 2006 memorandum, additionally quoted at length Sipe'’ Open Letter to Pope Benedict. A striking part of this letter is that Sipe had offered Pope Benedict to give him the evidence in order to prove his point that McCarrick is a homosexual predator. “If Your Holiness requests,” Sipe wrote in 2008, “I will submit to you personally documentation of that about which I have spoken.” As far as we know, the Vatican has never contacted Richard Sipe to ask him for his evidence. There is nothing mentioned about it in the Report.

That Pope Benedict saw Sipe’s Open Letter is highly likely since the letter not only came to him by way of Viganò’s memorandum, but also by way of Monsignor Joseph Augustine Di Noia, O.P., an official at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, acting on behalf of Prefect Levada, who forwarded the letter to Cardinal Bertone. On the envelope containing Sipe’s letter, Cardinal Bertone wrote on May 19, 2008: “Two hypotheses: either not to respond or report to N.A. [the Apostolic Nuncio] confidentially.” But then also Pope Benedict’s own secretary commented on it, thereby indicating that he had seen it, too. Below Cardinal Bertone’s note, Monsignor Georg Gänswein wrote: “Return to Card. Bertone in a reserved manner.” The handwritten comments by both Gänswein and Bertone do not indicate that it was planned to contact Mr. Sipe.

Let us return to Viganò’s 2008 Memorandum.

After quoting Sipe's letter, Archbishop Viganò stated in his Memorandum that “to the many scandals in the Church in the United States, it seems that another of particular gravity concerning a Cardinal is about to be added.” Here, the Italian prelate now pointed once more to the responsibility of the Pope in this matter and then proposed that a canonical investigation of McCarrick could and should be opened: “The case of Card. McCarrick,” Viganò wrote, “as has been said, is within the sole competence of the Roman Pontiff, who could, possibly, entrust the Promoter of Justice of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith with commencing an investigative process as soon as possible.”

In a manuscript note on Archbishop Viganò’s Memorandum, Cardinal Bertone wrote: “I agree with the observations, though it seems to me that the most recent report of the [Apostolic Nuncio] Msgr. Sambi contains testimony in defense (in some manner) of the Cardinal. Will it be possible to carry out proposal n. 6? (But let’s hear, naturally, from the Holy Father). B.”

This note by Bertone is important since it shows that Pope Benedict would be informed about this memorandum and then asked for guidance and new instructions. Bertone clearly doubted that a canonical investigation was the right thing to do, and it is possible that he convinced the Pope of his opinion, even though we do not have any evidence for that.

The McCarrick Report now simply states: “No formal investigation or penal process was conducted at that time,” adding that “a search of the records of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith turned up no file and no archival ‘position’ related to McCarrick prior to 2018.”

As the Report stresses, this second Viganò memorandum was nevertheless taken into consideration. “Finally, as explained below, Cardinal Re did take certain measures in June 2008, just a month after Viganò’s second memorandum,” the report states.

Cardinal Re actually also rebuked McCarrick for having appeared at a public event together with Pope Benedict, in mid-May of 2008. The Report states: “Accordingly, following the event, Cardinal Re approached McCarrick and reproved him for his public presence, repeating that McCarrick was supposed to be conducting a more reserved life. McCarrick did not take Cardinal Re’s verbal admonition well and, according to Re, McCarrick avoided him thereafter.” Re told McCarrick, who protested and insisted upon his innocence: “True or not true, the accusations exist! You, for the good of the Church, must not be going around.”

On May 27, 2008, in response to Cardinal Re’s inquiry several weeks before, Nuncio Sambi wrote a report. Among the things he related were two important facts, namely, that “the priests that the Cardinal invites to go with him to the sea seem to [the Vice Rector of Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Washington] to be of a homosexual tendency; one of them made an indecent proposal to him.” Secondly, Sambi stressed the possible damage to the soul of McCarrick should he live a too restricted life, thereby promoting a lenient approach in his case: “nobody will succeed in convincing the Cardinal to accept ‘a life in retirement’: it is not part of who he is; if it were to be imposed on him, psychological collapse (depression) and even psychosis are to be feared.”

Not long after this report, Cardinal Re instructs Sambi on June 14, 2008 that McCarrick should move away from the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, living in a religious house, and that he “conduct a more private life,” accepting invitations in the U.S. or abroad only with the approval of the Holy See. On the same day, he wrote to McCarrick directly, telling him “not to make public appearances and to conduct a quiet life of prayer and penance for past imprudent actions.” “I know that this goes against your natural character,” Re continued, “since you enjoy getting together with others in order to do so much good and spread the values of the Gospel in every setting.” Therefore, the cardinal added, “I appeal to your ecclesial spirit and I am obliged to ask you not to accept invitations for any public events.”

Let us remember at this point that these June 14, 2008 instructions very much resemble the October 17, 2006 indications given to McCarrick, namely to move away from the seminary he was dwelling in at the time, as well as “to lead a reserved life of prayer, so as to not cause himself to be spoken of.”

However, these 2008 lenient measures constituted no canonical sanctions. The report explained that “Cardinal Re stated in an interview that his 14 June 2008 letter to McCarrick ‘was not juridical in nature’ and depended upon the expectation that Cardinal McCarrick, as a bishop, would comply with the request of the Holy See.”

Once more Pope Benedict XVI is shown in the Report to have been kept informed about the McCarrick case. After Cardinal Re informed him “of the decision of the Congregation for Bishops to urge McCarrick to lead a quiet life,” the Pope approved. Re stated: “I communicated to the Pope the contents of the letter [containing the new instructions to McCarrick], the substance of the letter, and the Pope was in agreement. He said, ‘Good, very good.’” Additionally, through Archbishop Gänswein, the Pope also recalled receiving Cardinal Re in audience, being briefed on the situation regarding Cardinal McCarrick, and reviewing Re’s June 14, 2008 letter to McCarrick. States the Report: “The Pope Emeritus also recalled approving the approach taken in Cardinal Re’s letter.”

The problem, once more, was that the Vatican was not yet sure about the truth of the allegations against McCarrick. As the Report states: “In an interview, Cardinal Bertone noted that the allegations against McCarrick did not relate to minors, that they were ambiguous with regard to overt sexual conduct, and that they were deemed untrue by those who lived with McCarrick. Given McCarrick’s strong denials and the fact that he was already emeritus, the focus of Holy See officials was on the need to avoid drawing unwarranted attention to allegations that remained unproven.”

It seems only Archbishop Viganò saw the matter in a different light, if we consider his two 2006 and 2008 memoranda.

2009

In early 2009, Cardinal McCarrick, adhering to Cardinal Re’s request that he leave the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, moved into an upper floor apartment connected to the St. Thomas the Apostle parish in Washington, D.C., as had been arranged by Archbishop Donald Wuerl. However, McCarrick maintained his office at the Redemptoris Mater Seminary and traveled there frequently for work, thereby remaining present in the seminary.

To sum up what happened after the June 2008 instructions given by Rome to McCarrick: He maintained for about half a year an intense correspondence with Re about his activities, asking for permission for them. However, the communications then ceased and he merely remained in contact with Archbishop Sambi who seemed positive about the lists of activities that McCarrick was presenting to him. As we know from other sources, such as Monsignor Anthony Figueiredo, the U.S. cardinal kept on intensely working with curial cardinals such as Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, Cardinal Peter Turkson, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, and Archbishop Peter Gallagher, the Vatican’s foreign minister.

McCarrick also seemed to resent the instructions from the Vatican, especially since they were not even given to him in the name of the Pope. “Cardinal Re wants me out of the seminary, but unless the Pope tells me I won’t go anyplace,” he is being quoted as saying in the Report. McCarrick also insisted that “I am a cardinal of Mother Church and it has to be the Pope who tells me what I can and can’t do.”

The Vice Rector of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary where McCarrick had lived and worked in retirement did not recall a significant slowing down of McCarrick’s activities. On the contrary, according to the McCarrick Report, the Vice Rector said: “I didn’t really see any change in activities. I do remember that he was focused on helping the State Department with things. Peace talks in the Middle East, Israel, China. There was a lot of that. He was traveling all the time. He was a Cardinal of the Church but it was more than just assisting a Cardinal or a Cardinal Emeritus, since his activities went well beyond that and entered also into the political realm. And during those years that I was helping him, he continued doing that. The activity did not go down. On the contrary, there was more and more and more of it.” The same has been corroborated by a priest in Rome who worked as a secretary for McCarrick.

The Report states that from May 2009 on, there was no correspondence taking place between McCarrick and Rome: “After his letter of 15 May 2009, there is no further trace of McCarrick having written again to Cardinal Re or to any other official of the Congregation for Bishops, including Cardinal Ouellet, the new Prefect appointed on 30 June 2010. There is also no record of correspondence from any official of the Congregation for Bishops to McCarrick after Cardinal Re’s letter of 30 May 2009.”

When the new Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops, Cardinal Marc Ouellet came into office in June of 2010, his predecessor did not even speak with him about McCarrick, at least according to the McCarrick Report: “Cardinal Ouellet and Cardinal Re did not discuss the McCarrick matter at the time that Ouellet was installed as Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops in mid-2010.” In an interview, Cardinal Re stated that he “never spoke with Ouellet about the question of McCarrick” because “[i]t was a resolved case for me.”

It is astonishing how those intimately involved in this fairly confidential dealing with McCarrick had so little interest in making sure the U.S. cardinal followed the Vatican's instructions about leading a private life of prayer.

The McCarrick Report sums up the situation as follows: “While Pope Benedict XVI was informed by Cardinal Bertone regarding the options available with respect to McCarrick, the Holy Father did not authorize an investigation or other proceeding that might have resulted in findings of fact upon which more decisive action could have been taken. The Holy Father did not impose sanctions or restrictions on McCarrick’s activity.” While the last sentence is a bit of a sophistical statement – since they did ask him to restrict his movements – it is at the same time true since no one in the Vatican insisted that McCarrick should actually follow these rules of leading a more restricted life. Whether the McCarrick report tries here to lay blame on Benedict or not, the facts do not look good.

It was clear that Cardinal Re did not pay special attention to McCarrick’s continued activities, and that he did not see himself obliged to control him. As the Report has it, Cardinal Re stated in an interview that he was “unaware that McCarrick had continued to be active and that he believed that McCarrick, in accordance with the language of Re’s letter of 14 June 2008, was withdrawing to live a quiet life.” Cardinal Re said: “I, in fact, had the impression that everything was calm. After [my 14 June 2008 letter], I thought that he was not taking any more trips. That he remained tranquil in the United States. This was the impression that I had … that he had understood the import and importance of my letter and that he had retired. I do not recall any further contact with him after that.”

Here we quote the report once more with regard to Pope Benedict himself:

Through Archbishop Gänswein, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI stated that he believed that, after Cardinal Re’s letter was given to McCarrick, the approach set forth in the letter was coherently followed in the ensuing years. The Pope Emeritus was unaware that the original indications may have been relaxed or that Nuncio Sambi had adopted a flexible approach to McCarrick’s travel and public activity. Like Cardinal Re, the Holy Father did not recall being aware, or being made aware, that McCarrick continued to travel frequently after 2008.

If the head of an organization wants to make sure that a certain collaborator abides by certain rules, he sets up certain persons with the task of implementing his rules and watching over that collaborator. Benedict obviously did not have the will to do so, thus showing a lack of interest in the matter.

2010 until 2012

McCarrick remained active also in the Papal Foundation and participated as such in April of 2010 in an audience with Pope Benedict who, according to McCarrick, was “most gracious” with him.

McCarrick also traveled to Rome to meet with Pope Benedict XVI on January 16, 2012, on the occasion of the Ad Limina visit of the Archdiocese of Washington, thereby showing the Pope that he was still active.

Consistent with his approach during Archbishop Sambi’s tenure as Nuncio, Cardinal McCarrick kept Viganò informed of his activities when he became the new nuncio in late 2011. But, as in 2006 and 2008, this Italian prelate was not at ease with what he saw when he came to Washington and repeatedly wrote to his superiors in Rome about McCarrick’s continued activities and asking them for instructions as to how he should deal with this problem.

For example, on August 13, 2012, Viganò wrote to Cardinal Ouellet and described the continued activities, public appearances, and travels of McCarrick, reiterated the “indications” given to the U.S. cardinal, and concluded: “Accordingly, one can affirm that Cardinal Re’s admonition to him is a dead letter.” He also stated that “Cardinal McCarrick therefore should not have accepted any invitation of a public nature and should have ‘conducted a quiet life of prayer and penance for past imprudent actions.’ The Cardinal did not obey this advice.” In light of a new priest filing complaints with regard to McCarrick, Viganò concluded his letter with the words: “I therefore request instructions as to how I should act in this regard.”

(Here we do not go in detail into the Vatican’s attempt at blaming Viganò for not fulfilling Ouellet’s subsequent instructions concerning the priest who had issued complaints about McCarrick. From what can even be seen in the Report, Viganò did send follow-up information about the case to Rome, to include that the court had dismissed the priest’s case and that one U.S. bishop called this priest unreliable. Additionally, in an interview with Raymond Arroyo, Archbishop Viganò added that he had had an unrecorded telephone call with Ouellet about this matter that is not mentioned in the Report. It is embarrassing that the Report claims that only because Viganò did not follow up on the priest’s accusations, Cardinal Ouellet did not see any need to brief newly-elected Pope Francis in 2013 about the McCarrick case whose history goes far beyond Viganò’s time. That Viganò was friendly in dealing with McCarrick in his position as nuncio can also not be laid at his feet since he was simply abiding by the tone set by Pope Benedict, as well as the curial cardinals who closely worked together with McCarrick. Let us consider how in the story that we relate here, Viganò appears to have been the only Vatican prelate truly concerned about McCarrick’s misdeeds.)

On September 8 of the same year, Viganò told Ouellet again about an incident where McCarrick wanted to participate in a diocesan event, but Viganò intervened. He pointed out that the “situation, in any case, confirms how much Cardinal McCarrick no longer takes into consideration the provisions given to him in the past by this Congregation” and stated that, in his opinion, it would be “opportune” that “new directives be eventually communicated to this Apostolic Nunciature, in light of the aforesaid facts.”

On September 12, Ouellet answered Viganò, renewing the old “instructions” that had been largely ignored by McCarrick: “However, even in the event that [Priest 3’s] accusations against Cardinal McCarrick were to turn out to be unfounded,” Ouellet wrote, “if the facts were made public, they could harm the Cardinal and the Church.” He continued:

Therefore, I ask that Your Excellency have a conversation with the Cardinal, presenting to him this new accusation against him, reiterating to Cardinal McCarrick, for his own good and for the good of the Church, the previous indications of this Dicastery: to lead a more reserved life of prayer (cf. Letter of this Dicastery bearing the same protocol number, dated June 14, 2008) and not to accept public commitments, whether in the United States or abroad, without the prior and explicit permission of the Holy See (cf. Letter from this Dicastery bearing the same protocol number, dated September 8, 2008).

Unfortunately, both Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal Ouellet confirmed that Ouellet did not discuss the new developments in the McCarrick case with the Pope, whether before or after sending the letter to Archbishop Viganò

For Ouellet, once he had sent the letter to Viganò in September 2012, he considered the matter as “something that had been handled. It was no longer something that was pending.” In his October 2018 open letter, Cardinal Ouellet had even stated that he never discussed the McCarrick case with Pope Benedict, a sign that also the Pope did not show special interest in the matter; otherwise he could have told Ouellet to keep him updated on the matter.

“Since I became Prefect of this Congregation on 30 June 2010,” Ouellet wrote on October 7, 2018, “I never brought up the McCarrick case in an audience with Pope Benedict XVI or Pope Francis until these last days, after his removal from the College of Cardinals.”

Again, it is certainly a sign of lack of sensitivity toward such a potential moral scandal that the head of the Congregation for Bishops would not have an ongoing discussion about McCarrick with the successive popes, nor would make sure that he receives regular updates on McCarrick’s behavior, also in light of the fact that McCarrick appeared at papal audiences and events.

2013 until 2014

In February of 2013, Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation, leaving the unresolved McCarrick case behind.

That Viganò also after Benedict’s resignation did not give up being concerned about the McCarrick situation is being recorded in the McCarrick Report, as well, and perhaps against its own intentions at dismissing Viganò’s witness. As the author of the Report writes: “Cardinal Re also recounted that Nuncio Viganò met with him in the Vatican just prior to Viganò’s October 2013 meeting with Pope Francis. Viganò gave Cardinal Re a copy of the 14 June 2008 letter from Re to McCarrick and told Re that he believed that the indications set forth in that letter were no longer being followed. Viganò stated that he intended to raise his concerns about McCarrick with Pope Francis.” As we now know from Viganò’s own 2018 testimony, that is also what he did in June of 2013.

One last time, in 2014, Viganò raised his voice of concern. On 5 May 2014, Nuncio Viganò wrote to Cardinal Parolin about McCarrick’s trip and the prior indications. Nuncio Viganò wrote: “You are probably already well acquainted with the journeys which, with a certain frequency, His Eminence Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, Archbishop emeritus of Washington, undertakes in various parts of the world, given that, at times, such news circulates in the media. … For my part, … I feel the duty to transmit this news to Your Eminence, in consideration of the fact that the Congregation for Bishops, in the persons of the Most Eminent Card. Giovanni Battista Re, Prefect emeritus, and of the Most Eminent Card. Marc Ouellet, current Prefect, has repeatedly given instructions to the aforementioned Cardinal to refrain from making trips and “not to make public appareances” (sic) (see Foglio No. [redacted], dated 14 June 2008 by Card. Re to Card. McCarrick). The reasons for this provision are certainly available from this Secretariat of State and the Congregation for Bishops. They could possibly no longer be in effect, in which case I would like to be comforted by new instructions in this regard.”

But this was clearly already under Pope Francis who had his own political agendas and interests. Accordingly, Cardinal Parolin, after having been informed about the history of the McCarrick case made a note on July 20, 2014, saying that “in a forthcoming meeting in Rome I will speak with Cardinal McCarrick about the problems raised by [Bishop] Viganò, about whom I was also able to speak with Cardinal Ouellet.” With respect to the alternative channel in China through McCarrick’s contacts, Cardinal Parolin adhered to the diplomatic precept that it is best to promote dialogue and “never close a door.” On that basis, Parolin permitted McCarrick’s own China initiatives.

Archbishop Viganò was left out of this discussion, though on March 16, 2015, Archbishop Becciu responded to his May 2014 letter “concerning the travels undertaken by Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, Archbishop Emeritus of Washington.” The Substitute wrote, “In thanking you for the information and the observations which you provided, I would assure you that they have been carefully noted.”

In hindsight, it might have been better for the Catholic Church had Pope Benedict done what Archbishop Viganò had proposed in 2008, namely, that a canonical investigation of the allegations against McCarrick was to be instigated. As we have seen by now, the lack of interest on the part of Pope Benedict in the McCarrick case — in light of increasing numbers of warning voices about McCarrick — was fatal for the Church.


  carlo maria viganò, mccarrick report, pope benedict xvi, sexual misconduct, sexual sins, theodore mccarrick

Blogs

French traditionalists show us how to take back our churches when closed by bishops

What I wish to emphasize is the need for Catholics, both laity and clergy, to move into a more decisive phase of resistance against unjust determinations of either temporal or ecclesiastical authority.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:50 pm EST
Featured Image
Peter Kwasniewski Peter Kwasniewski Follow Dr. Peter
By Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – It’s easy to understand some of the poor decisions that were reached in the first months of the outbreak of COVID-19. We did not know how harmful it would be or how quickly it would spread, and whether our medical facilities would be overwhelmed. However, as time passed, and the statistics became better known, we came to see quite clearly—or I should say, anyone who took a few moments to step past the Pravda-like unified mainstream media narrative—that we are dealing with something like a severe flu season, comparable to many other epidemics that have come and gone in the past. COVID-19 is a disease with a low fatality rate if one removes cases of co-morbidities. Therefore, even if we are willing to forgive Lockdown 1.0 as the panicked reaction of the unprepared, the same spirit should not extent to the cold calculation behind Lockdown 2.0, which is well under way in a number of European countries and now in some American dioceses.

Bishops have the God-given responsibility to apply their reason to evaluate the seriousness of the risks while at the same time preserving and promoting the essential goods of Christian life, which include liturgical worship and reception of sacraments. These are not only indispensable for the sanctification of individuals, which is reason enough to uphold them, come what may; they are also necessary for beseeching divine assistance and pardon. It would require a great deal more danger than anything we have seen to make long-standing restrictions on worship and sacraments legitimate; nothing could warrant their simple cancellation. It is unjust, tout court, for churches to be shut against the faithful, for public Masses to be eliminated, for Confessions or extreme unction to be lessened or unavailable, for Adoration to be suspended, and so forth. So much has been written on this subject that further commentary is not necessary here.

Rather, what I wish to emphasize is the need for Catholics, both laity and clergy, to move into a more decisive phase of resistance against unjust determinations of either temporal or eccelsiastical authority. The tumultuous history after the Second Vatican Council offers us models. In an interview soon to appear at Rorate Caeli, Christian Marquant, the head of Paix Liturgique, speaks of two that occurred in France:

Catholic resistance had not been completely asphyxiated—but that was no reason for its opponents to stop their persecutions. Everywhere, by calumny or even by force, they did all in their power to prevent Masses, catechisms, schools. Paradoxically, and contrary to every Vatican II principle of promoting the laity, this will to eradicate came from the clergy and attacked the people. Indeed, historians and sociologists have noted that the refusal of conciliar novelties was an essentially lay and popular phenomenon. The Catholic people was not taking it lying down. Two important popular events shook the Church of France during this time: first, in 1977, the storming of Saint Nicolas du Chardonnet by a crowd of Parisian faithful following Msgr. Ducaud-Bourget; they were sick and tired of attending Mass in rented halls. Later, near Versailles in 1987, there was the reaction of the parishioners at Saint Louis du Port Marly who refused allow their community to be killed: they had been kicked out of their church, its doors had been walled up . . . and they simply kicked down the doors to move back in.

The latter event in particular deserves to be better known among Catholics everywhere. A Catholic parish in Port Marly, twenty miles from Paris, had maintained the Latin Mass after Vatican II. When the parish priest died, the bishop attempted to impose the new Mass in French. The people occupied the church, refused to welcome the new pastor, and maintained a priest of their own to continue the traditional Mass. The bishop retaliated by having 50 police officers come and take back the church, clubbing and dragging out men, women, and children from the pews. The police then sealed the doors of the church with cemented cinder blocks.

Two weeks later, for Palm Sunday of 1987, 3,000 traditionalists came back to the church in procession. A group of laymen with a battering ram shattered through the cinder blocks and the faithful took possession of the church. “If the police come to evict us again,” said Francis Tommy-Martin, on guard duty in the church, “we can have more than 500 people in the streets in less than an hour.” In spite of a continually rocky relationship with the local Diocese of Versailles, the traditional community in Port Marly remained steady to the present, and, in more recent years, was established as a parish under the care of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest.

Here is the full video of that memorable Palm Sunday in 1987. The segment during which the procession reaches the church and the battering ram brings down the blocked entrances can be seen here:

This video is a reminder of how bad things had become in France (and nearly everywhere else except, perhaps, Campos, Brazil) after the Second Vatican Council — and of the courage and strength of loyal resistance. Just as the loyal Catholics of the Vendée opposed the Revolution in France, so loyal French Catholics resisted the “revolution in tiara and cope”; and so must we do in our day. The COVID-1984 scamdemic has caught us quite unprepared for the rapid power-grab of civil and ecclesiastical authorities, who recognized a golden opportunity to overcome nascent populism and traditionalism. We will need to learn quickly, and implement fearlessly, the more down-to-earth methods of those who have succeeded in the past against all odds.


  catholic, coronavirus, coronavirus restrictions, france, lockdowns

Blogs

HBO documentary ‘Transhood’ shows mom forcing her son to declare himself a girl at religious ceremony

As Matt Walsh pointed out, the 'poor child appears to have no interest in being paraded around like his mother’s show pony'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 12:13 pm EST
Featured Image
Screen grab from HBO's 2020 documentary 'Transhood' HBO / video screen grab
Jonathon Van Maren Jonathon Van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon Van Maren

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Back in 2018, I covered the emergence of bizarre new pastoral guidance released by the Anglican House of Bishops in the United Kingdom laying out a new ecclesiastical service called the “Affirmation of Baptismal Faith.” In that service, clergy members lay hands on transgender people, address them by their “new name,” and often use water and oil (although the bishops note that this is not, strictly speaking, a baptism.) “For a trans person to be addressed liturgically by the minister for the first time by their chosen name may be a powerful moment in the service,” the guidance reads. The service enables people to “renew the commitments made in baptism and in a public setting and provides space for those who have undergone a major transition to Jesus Christ.”

In short, this service constitutes formal approval of transgenderism and gender ideology, with a religious ceremony to give it a whiff of ecclesiastical solidity. But at least this blasphemous “service,” which cannibalizes various rituals in an attempt to appear sane, was cobbled together for adults.

As it turns out, “transgender baptisms” are catching on. Earlier this week, Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire posted a clip from the HBO documentary Transhood depicting a child being inducted into transgenderism via a religious ceremony conducted by a woman. The church, apparently, is the unitarian universalist church (which sounds like something someone invented to make fun of them), and the parishioners—or whatever they’re called—are called on to “proclaim their identify publicly as lesbian, gray, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning, intersex, pansexual, asexual, or any category I’ve left out.”

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

Matt Walsh describes the scene that follows thusly:

A mother then pulls her young son (four years old, it turns out) onto the stage to announce that he’s really a girl. But the poor child appears to have no interest in being paraded around like his mother’s show pony. He hands the microphone back. “I don’t want to do it,” he protests. The mother takes it upon herself to come out on her son’s behalf, informing the audience that her boy, Phoenix, “would like you to know that she’s a girl and she prefers she and her pronouns.”

Completing the apparently familiar ritual, the pastor hands the child a pink flower as the congregation repeats its creepy affirmation in unison: “May you be well, safe, and whole. We honor you exactly as you are.” Of course, that’s the exact opposite of what they are really doing. 

The entire documentary, it turns out, showcases “trans kids” being led on the journey to transition by often all-too-enthusiastic parents. These children are embarking on a journey of first social and then medical transition that will transform not only their childhood and their teen years, which will become a miserable haze of hormone blockers, cross-dressing, and a confusing combination of breasts, beards, and stunted genitals, but their entire lives. Abigail Shrier described the long-term impact on children in her essential book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters (which she discussed with me on our podcast.) What we are doing to children is nothing short of criminal.

Adam Ford’s response to the video was one of outrage: “What is that boy, 8? 9? Do you for one second believe that he "decided to be a girl" on his own? Literally a zero percent chance. His mother, who is clearly the head of his family, brainwashed him into believing he is a girl. She pulled him up on stage after coaching him on exactly what he was expected to say. When he couldn't do it, she did it for him. Now why would she do all of that? Only one reason: For herself. She gets all the woke points. She gets to proclaim how progressive she is, to have raised a trans child. She gets to redeem those sweet, sweet intersectionality and oppression points on behalf of her family. She pimps out her own child and reaps the rewards.”

That is precisely it. Those who question this vile new religion—replete with genital mutilation, a staple of a particularly fundamentalist branch of Islam—are accused of wanting trans kids to kill themselves or of being “transphobic.” The West’s religious quislings, presiding over a ridiculous collection of post-Christian woke-cults, work overtime to quell the doubts that inevitably arise by attempting to give all of this a whiff of the sacred. And, as is so often the case, the children suffer the consequences.

I wonder if these false “shepherds” have ever read Luke 17:2: “It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”

Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Dr. Ryszard Legutko, a philosopher, politician, and professor from Krakow, Poland, to discuss Legutko’s fight against both communism and liberal democracy. 

Legutko also indicates paradoxical similarities in Liberal Democracy, which, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, widely took the systemic place of Communism throughout various Eastern European countries.

You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below: 


  child abuse, hbo, matt walsh, transgenderism, transhood

Blogs

Why Toronto cardinal must ask Catholic school trustees to resign

'He must remove the wolves from amongst the sheep'
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:37 am EST
Featured Image
Cardinal Thomas Collins at Notre Dame Cathedral Pete Baklinski / LifeSiteNews
Jeff Gunnarson
By Jeff Gunnarson

November 24, 2020 (Campaign Life Coalition) – Following Campaign Life Coalition’s (CLC) publishing of a video showing three Toronto Catholic School Trustees attacking the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Thomas Collins sent a scathing letter to Board Chair, Joseph Martino.

The Cardinal Archbishop's letter:

  • described the trustees' public heresy as "reprehensible";
  • questioned their ability to "fulfil their sacred mission"
  • implied that they violated their oath of office;
  • subtly warned that they may be dragging the Board towards a future in which its "education ceases to be Catholic";
  • suggested that if Christ himself were to delegate before them, Trustees might interrupt and shout Him down too.

Read His Eminence's full letter to trustees, here

How Trustees disgraced themselves and betrayed their oath of office

Let's recap why the Cardinal penned this letter.

At a November 11th TCDSB meeting, Ward 9 Trustee Norm Di Pasquale blocked a Catholic delegate from reading paragraph 2357 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which expresses official teaching on homosexuality. The Trustee called it "dangerous".

Trustee Martino followed up and described the words of the Catechism as "not proper" and warned the delegate about continuing to read the Church teaching.

— 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

Finally, Ward 5 Trustee Maria Rizzo piled on and described the recitation of the Catechism as "unacceptable".

You can watch the shocking exchange on video by clicking here.

The special Board meeting had been called by Ward 2 Trustee Markus De Domenico in order to persecute his colleague, Trustee Michael Del Grande. The latter had tried to defend Catholic sexual teaching at a past board meeting by opposing a proposal for the TCDSB to embrace Transgender Ideology. 

De Domenico and a cabal of other dissident trustees falsely characterized Del Grande's defence of Catholicism as a Code of Conduct violation because it was allegedly "hurtful" to "the LGBTQ community".

The delegate who was interrupted in reciting the Catechism was speaking in defense of Del Grande at the time, and against a motion on the floor to find him "guilty" so that sanctions could be imposed upon him.

Ultimately, eight dissident trustees voted in favour of finding Del Grande guilty and imposed severe sanctions on the faithful Catholic. Trustee Del Grande will appeal the ruling and likely go to court to ask a judge to overturn the decision as an unlawful abuse of process. CLC believes he will win.

Cardinal didn't go far enough - must ask Trustees to resign

We're very happy that Cardinal Collins has finally ended his silence on the public heresy of the TCDSB trustees. His strongly-worded rebuke of these trustees was excellent, and we thank him for that. 

However, it was not sufficient.

His Eminence has a moral and canon law responsibility to insist upon the resignation of the eight dissident trustees on the board who have brought Catholic education into disrepute, undermined and attacked the teachings of Our Lord and the Catechism. 

Until the Cardinal does so, CLC is forced to repeats its request for Catholics in Toronto to continue withholding Sunday offerings. In case you are not aware, the Bishop’s office collects a tax on all Sunday donations which goes to the chancery coffers and which must be remitted by the parish priest. 

The Cardinal Archbishop has the moral and legal authority to right this sinking ship that is the TCDSB. And because he has a love for souls, that’s what His Eminence will surely do. He must remove the wolves from amongst the sheep.

Catholics still have other means of fulfilling their obligation to provide for the financial needs of the Church while at the same time, withholding donations to the Cardinal Archbishop. Useful suggestions for doing so are described here and here.

What does Canon Law say about a Bishop's responsibility for schools in his diocese?

The Code of Canon Law, in sections 802 through 806, makes it abundantly clear that there is no other person on whose shoulders falls the ultimate responsibility of ensuring that Catholic school boards are authentically Catholic in their doctrine and teaching.

Canon Law lays out the rights and responsibilities of the local diocesan bishop, stating unambiguously that he is responsible for establishing schools “that are imbued with a Christian spirit” and which he, as the local ordinary, has the responsibility to “direct”. It's irrefutable that the TCDSB's "spirit" is now more secular than Christian. Hence the need for the diocesan Bishop to intervene.

We are not asking His Eminence to do anything above and beyond the call of duty. This is his job. Pure and simple.

These trustees are so clearly entrenched in their opposition to Catholic doctrine that no other remedy exists but to publicly ask for their immediate resignation.

The Cardinal should also warn, as part of his request for their resignation, that if they refuse to step down, he will bar the TCDSB from using the name "Catholic" on any of its schools or offices. This is his right under Canon Law section 803.3.

What secular, legal powers does Cardinal Collins have at his disposal?

Besides cleaning house on the Board of Trustees (or in addition), the Cardinal has the constitutional right to immediately expel from his school system all policies and curriculum which undermine Catholic teaching, and which have infiltrated Catholic schools over the past 20 years.

Every Catholic School Board in Ontario, and every local Bishop, has the power to invoke Section 93 of the Constitution Act of 1867 to reject any provincial law or regulation which adversely affect the content of faith and morals in Catholic denominational schools.

The Supreme Court of Canada has twice affirmed that the constitutional right of Catholics schools in Ontario is “absolute” in this regard, and is "immune" to a Charter challenge.

This constitutionally-protected right for Catholic schools in Ontario is explicitly acknowledged in section 19.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, and in section 230.19(1) of the Education Act itself. 

Cardinal Collins does not even have to go to court. He simply has to announce to the Minister of Education that Catholic schools in Toronto will no longer accept curriculum, policies or directives that have been imposed by the Ontario government over the years, including the Ministry’s Code of Conduct requirement to include Gender Identity Theory and other anti-Christian terms. 

Given the scandal of public heresy on parade at the TCDSB in recent times, we recommend to his Eminence that it is time to invoke Section 93, and undertake a sweeping reform to restore its heavily degraded Catholic character.

Those teachers, staff, students and parents who don't want a return to authentic Catholicism should be respectfully invited to leave for the public system where they can be more true to themselves.  The charade of pretending to be "Catholic" in order to more effectively undermine Church teaching from within, must finally come to an end.

If the Catholic education community shrinks as a result, so be it.  At least it will be faithful to God.

Contact Cardinal Collins

Please email, write or phone Cardinal Collins to respectfully request that he immediately ask for the resignation of Trustees Martino, De Domenico, Li Preti, Rizzo, D'Amico, Di Pasquale, Di Giorgio and Kennedy.

     Cardinal Thomas Collins
     Archdiocese of Toronto
     1155 Yonge Street
     Toronto, Ontario M4T 1W2
     Tel: 416-934-0606, ext. 609
     Email: [email protected]

If you're a Catholic in Toronto, respectfully inform his Eminence that you will be withholding Sunday donations until such time as the Cardinal has publicly requested the resignation of the dissident trustees.

Please also contribute to Michael Del Grande's legal defense fund. We cannot allow his voice to be unlawfully silenced by this cabal of anti-Catholic trustees. He's going to court to defend himself, and we need to help him keep fighting for authentic Catholic teaching. Donate here.

Editor’s note: This article first appeared on Campaign Life Coalition here and has been reprinted by permission of the author. 


  campaign life coalition, canada, catholic, michael del grande, mike del grande, ontario, thomas collins, toronto catholic district school board

Blogs

How voting machines were used to bring Communist tyranny to power in Venezuela

The USA may escape this doom, because it has a group of patriots who actually wield important power (since the constitutional president is still Trump) and who are willing to confront the oligarchy.
Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 11:33 am EST
Featured Image
Venezuelan former president Hugo Chávez with Cuba's Fidel Castro. Getty Images / Staff
Prof. Carlos A. Casanova
By

November 24, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — I am a native Venezuelan and a philosopher. In 1999 I was chair of graduate studies in Philosophy of the Universidad Simón Bolívar in Caracas. In that capacity I fought against Hugo Chávez’s communist tyranny, especially against its attempts to control our universities. In 2001 I was threatened but I kept working for the republic, although I knew it was dangerous. In 2002 Chávez was ousted for a couple of days. When he came back, the media did not dare to have me again in their outlets, so I decided it was time to leave the country. I left for the U.S.A. and I stayed there until 2005. That year I got a job in Chile, and that is where I am now.

I saw the entire November 19 press conference given by the Trump legal team thanks to independent internet outlets such as LifeSiteNews. I thought that they were entirely right, very clear, and that they provided all the evidence they could provide. Immediately after, I saw CNN’s statement about the press conference. According to one of the networks’ reporters, the conference was “so banana and so biased” that they decided not to air it for the American public.

This was, in my opinion, absolutely outrageous. How is it possible that journalists could in good conscience hide from the public such an important press conference given by the legal team of the President and one of the candidates for an election that is not closed? The levels of manipulation to which the people of the U.S.A. has been subjected are almost totalitarian.

Then I turned to Tucker Carlson, one of the few journalists in Fox News who still commanded a bit of my respect. But I got very surprised and very shocked when I saw the report of his November 19 evening show on Fox News: “Tucker Carlson: Time for Sidney Powell to Show Us Her Evidence.”[1] Carlson seems to ignore (according to Fox’s report of his show, which one cannot watch) the evidence that Sidney Powell brought, which is all that can be done right now:she has an affidavit from a member of the Venezuelan military who tells how the tyranny programmed the machines to do a fraud in Venezuela (his identity cannot be revealed because his family would be immediately killed); she stated that there are statistical patterns that show electronic manipulation of the results. All the legal team showed that the company, Smartmatic, is connected now to Soros, a financier of the Democratic Party. What else can she do right now?

My experience and what I saw in this press conference and its aftermath tells me that the U.S.A. is on the brink of falling into a communist tyranny. A very peculiar aspect of the case of the U.S.A. seems to be that this tyranny is being pressed on the majority of the people by a whole class of plutocrats, the owners of big media and big tech prominent among them. Normally the communists have come from part of the elite and they have become the only plutocrats after they conquer other political powers. But in the U.S.A. the story would be different: it would be the very plutocrats preexisting the tyranny who would impose it on the vast majority of the people. The attitude of the journalists might be due to many causes, one of them being the fear to face the grim prospect of a totalitarian tyranny. In these situations, always those who tell the truth are seen as a Jeremiah, a prophet of doom.

Cheer up! The U.S.A. may escape this doom, because it has a group of patriots who actually wield important power (since the constitutional president is still Trump) and who are willing to confront the oligarchy. The tragedy is that an important portion of the population does not know it because the plutocrats, using their power in turn, hide the reality of the situation.

But I want to give the reader a bit of the background that leads me to say what I am saying. I want to present the history of Smartmatic and the case of the 2004 referendum in Venezuela. Briefly…

Smartmatic was founded in 1999 by Alfredo Anzola and Antonio Mugica. Its first big business was the 2004 referendum in Venezuela, where the people had to vote if they wanted to oust Chávez from the presidency of the country. The organization of Smartmatic for this voting act was completed by Cuban agents who had designed or bought the software and was sold to Smartmatic under the name of Bizta.[2] The Carter Center and the OAS were the only two foreign observers. An opposition organization, Súmate, organized a secret exit poll. The night of the voting, before implementing any of the mandatory audits of the system and the votes count, President Carter “acknowledged” Chávez’s victory, allegedly based on the confluence of the pre-election polls and the results. The opposition was indignant because there were clear signs of a huge fraud. For example: the information should have flowed through the Smartmatic system from the voting centers to the counting centers and just in that direction. But during the afternoon, the information began to flow in both directions. Moreover, the exit polls showed that Chávez had been defeated.[3] So, the opposition asked for the mandatory audits, the matching of the paper ballots with the electronic results in some of the voting centers. A few were performed the next day and were disastrous for Chávez. So, the audit was suspended. The army took control of the paper ballots and a couple of days later burned them. But many of our (Venezuelan) excellent statisticians proved that the official results were mathematically impossible unless there had been manipulation of the data by the system.[4] Of course, the Carter Center always denied this because this statistical evidence showed to all who had eyes to see that Jimmy Carter was a tyrant lover and responsible for the systematic destruction and plundering of Venezuela.

After another referendum about Chávez’s reelection that took place in December 2007 Alfredo Anzola had some disagreements with the National Council for Elections because, although the government was unable to cheat due to the opposition of General Isaías Raúl Baduel, still they reduced the defeat to 49-51.  In April 27th2008 there was another strong disagreement concerning the cost that some government agents wanted to charge to Smartmatic for petty services. Anzola was not aware of the way in which the devil pays. That night agents of the tyranny found out that Anzola had planned a trip for the next day, to Curazao. When Anzola and his attorney took off, the airplane fell and crushed killing its three occupants and 6 persons on land. When journalists went to the scene of the accident the DISIP (the political police) and the Minister of Internal Affairs (Ramón Rodríguez Chacín) had the zone surrounded and its agents took the wounded and dead to a nearby hospital. At the hospital they saw none less than the President of the National Council for Elections who apparently wanted to make sure that Anzola was dead.[5] That is how only Antonia Mugica was left with Smartmatic.

The next year, in 2009, Smartmatic designed and implemented the electoral registration of bio-data in Bolivia in 2009.[6] Once more, the Carter Foundation vouchsafed for the excellence of Smartmatic’s work. But we all know that the Bolivian system is very much open to fraud. The 2019 fraud is universally known,[7] but there was fraud in 2020 as well.[8]

— 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 2014 in the board of the International Crisis Group, one can find (in 2017), besides Malloch-Brown, George Soros and Joanne Leedom-Acckerman, connected to “soft coups.” Soros is an important financer of the Democratic Party and has participated in the Ukranian coup d’etat in 2014 where he organized and trained the activists of the movement Euromaidan.[9]

Soros is a sinister character who has been forbidden to enter Russia[10] and Hungary,[11] but who seems to be untouchable in the U.S.A. Journalist Isabel Cuervo was fired along with her bosses from a public U.S.A. television network, Radio y televisión Martí, for having made a documentary in which she showed Soros’ dubious connections in Colombia, and Soros’ connections with Smartmatic and the elections in Venezuela. Cuervo was accused of being an anti-Semite.[12]

But this is not the end of the strange connection that one can do between Smartmatic and fraud, corruption and elections. In 2019 there was a public bidding to determine what firm was going to provide the electronic system to count the votes in Argentina. Since 2004 Smartmatic had an interest on this “market.” There seems to be a connection between Antonini Wilson, a man who was arrested with a briefcase containing 800,000 dollars cash at one of the Buenos Aires airports and Smartmatic.[13] Be it as it may, it is clear that in the end Smartmatic got what it wanted. Despite the Spanish firm, Indra, having much better technical qualifications, due to the pressures of Jorge Born Jr., (who is connected to Smartmatic and financer of then President Macri) Smartmatic got the contract. Smartmatic took control of the Argentinian elections, with the communist candidate, Alberto Fernández, connected to Cristina [Fernández] Kirchner.[14]

Dear free people of the U.S.A. Of course there are plenty of reasons to be concerned regarding the presence of Smartmatic in the Presidential elections of your country! Sidney Powell is entirely right and she has brought all the evidence that can be brought forward at this stage of the issue. I think the danger of this mingling of Smartmatic and its entourage to the U.S. election is so big that if the Trump campaign and the public force are unable to bring down the conspiracy of the Democratic Party and big media and big tech, I am almost certain that the republic of the U.S.A. will die and a new tyranny will rise. A tyranny foretold by George Orwell in Animal Farm, the marriage of Kamala Harris and her buddies supported by China et al. (the Communists), on the one hand, and the plutocrats, on the other. May God prevent this or else protect us all!

Footnotes


[2] “Carlos Julio Peñaloza: Una extraña muerte en Smartmatic,” La Patilla, September 11th2013. Available here: https://www.lapatilla.com/2013/09/11/carlos-julio-penaloza-una-extrana-muerte-en-smartmatic/

[3] The evidence of fraud is overwhelming. See http://webarticulista.net.free.fr/ta200617092349+Tulio-Alvarez+Informe+fraude-electoral+referendum-revocatorio+venezuela.html; and http://webarticulista.net.free.fr/fraudedemocrafinal.html

[4] See the papers by (1) Pericchi and Torres, (2) Delfino and Salas, (3) Prado and Sansó, (4) Hausmann and Rigobó, (5) Jiménez, in Project Euclid 26/4 (2011).

[5] “Carlos Julio Peñaloza: Una extraña muerte en Smartmatic” (cited).

[7] “Informe de la OEA concluye que hubo ‘manipulación y parcialidad’ en los comicios del 20 de octubre,” BBC News, December 5th2009. See: https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-50666779

[8]  See the study by profesor Jorge Videla: available here.

[9] “Los vínculos de Smartmatic con George Soros”, en Cuba Debate, 5 August 2017, available here: http://www.cubadebate.cu/especiales/2017/08/05/los-vinculos-de-smartmatic-con-george-soros/#.XyF6qJ4zbIU  (29 July 2020). See See also https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/129418-soros-admite-responsabilidad-golpe-conflicto-ucrania 

[10] See “Los vínculos de Smartmatic con George Soros”, cited.

[12] See “Isabel Cuervo, la periodista que enfrentó al todopoderoso George Soros”, en República, 17 June 2020, available here: https://republica.gt/2020/06/17/isabel-cuervo-la-periodista-que-enfrento-al-todopoderoso-george-soros/  (20 November 2020).

[13] Concerning these two facts, see “Investigan muerte misteriosa que echa luz sobre valijero”, Ámbito (Argentina), 13 de mayo del 2008, available here: https://www.ambito.com/politica/investigan-muerte-misteriosa-que-echa-luz-valijero-n3498308

[14] See “Argentina encarga el recuento electoral a una empresa chavista y excluye a las españolas”, Crónica Global, 22 de mayo de 2019, available here: https://cronicaglobal.elespanol.com/business/argentina-elecciones-empresa-chavista-espanolas_246864_102.html

 


  2020 election, george soros, hugo chávez, sidney powell, smartmatic, venezuela, voter fraud, voting machines

Featured Image

Episodes Tue Nov 24, 2020 - 6:24 pm EST

Ralph Martin explains steps needed to fix ‘terrible’ situation in the Church

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

Accomplished author and seminary professor Dr. Ralph Martin, the head of Renewal Ministries, an organization dedicated to Catholic evangelization, joins The John-Henry Westen Show to talk about his new book,“A Church in Crisis: Pathways Forward.”