OnePeterFive

Rebuilding Catholic Culture. Restoring Catholic Tradition.

• TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

Why Our Forebears Defended Latin in the Liturgy

 Joseph Shaw, PhDJanuary 20, 20220 Comments

• 65Shares
• 64
• 1

I have been reading the Traditionalist classic, Tito Cassini’s The Torn Tunic, first published (in Italian, La Tunica Stracciata) in 1967, reprinted by Angelico Press. It is an impassioned, indeed ferocious, statement of the case for liturgical traditionalism, written and published before the Novus Ordo Missae was promulgated. Casini, like most Catholics of the time, has only the vaguest idea what further changes were being cooked up. What he was objecting to was the things which had already been done, notably by the 1964 Instruction Inter Oecumenici, and the liturgical abuses which had been springing up. Casini’s focus, like that of the Latin Mass Societies and Una Voce groups which were founded as early as 1964, was the use of the Latin language.

As Casini notes, this was (or appeared to be) in direct contradiction to the Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Latin, Sacrosanctum Concilium promulgated in 1963, which states bluntly (Article 36.1) “the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” This Decree followed the very strong defence of Latin by Pope John XXIII the previous year, in his Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia, which admonishes bishops and religious superiors to be “on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, eager for revolutionary changes, writes against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the liturgy.” It was followed by the equally heart-felt pro-Latin Instruction of Pope Paul VI in 1964, Sacrificium Laudis, a document which has fallen so deeply into the memory-hole that the Latin Mass Society website hosts the only online English translation (it also forms an appendix to Casini’s book). In this context the complete disappearance of Latin, in rapid stages, alongside other hastily-formulated simplifications (the abolition of the Psalm Judica and the Last Gospel, the introduction of lay readers, etc.) is astonishing, and its effect on the people must have been enormous.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

It is not surprising that the initial focus of the Una Voce movement was accordingly on Latin. Not only does the name adopted for some national and local groups, “Latin Mass Society,” reflect this, but so does the alternative, “Una Voce,” which refers to Casini’s argument, drawn from the counter-revolutionary political theorist Joseph de Maistre, that Latin is the Church’s essential bond of unity.

To hear some people talk today, all this was an unfortunate misunderstanding, because the reformed Mass can also be celebrated in Latin. But this has never been in doubt, and indeed the celebration of the Novus Ordo in Latin was a far more realistic prospect in the early days of the Traditional Movement than it is today, since now very few priests have enough familiarity with Latin even to attempt it. The celebration of Mass in the vernacular has never been made compulsory by the law of the Church; it is just something which is universally expected. The expectation is so strong, however, that it seems to have the force of law. Zealous proponents of the reform appear to hate Latin, and regard priests who want to use Latin in the revised rites as opponents of the reform. This pattern became established quickly in the 1960s, and remains with us today. Complaints about Latin creeping into Novus Ordo celebrations went to Rome in advance of Traditionis Custodes,and explicit (and probably illegal) restrictions on the use of Latin in the reformed Mass have appeared in that document’s wake, notably in Costa Rica, but we might also presume a similar intention with St Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

From the reformers’ perspective, this makes perfect sense. The reform’s purpose was to facilitate “active participation” in the liturgy. Active participation is obviously a good thing, but as Casini notes the reform is driven by a rationalistic understanding of this phrase. On that basis, anything which impedes comprehension impedes participation.

It was a long time before the detailed work could be done to analyze the lectionary and the prayers of the Novus Ordo Missae, to determine exactly what had happened, and how abrupt was the discontinuity with the Church’s liturgical tradition, even in the Latin text.The first problem for many researchers is getting hold of the Latin at all, which is not available online. A priest I know who spent some time teaching in the seminary of England’s premier diocese, Westminster, discovered that there wasn’t a single copy in the place (he got them to buy one). Once you get it in your hands, it is no simple matter to find the corresponding source texts, in order to compare them.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Work on these issues is now coming to fruition, and this has revealed the discontinuity in the texts to have been much more radical than we might have imagined. However, none of this invalidates the impression given by the reform in those heady days of the 1960s: that it is above all an attack on the liturgical experience of the faithful, on the way ordinary Catholics prayed at Mass, an attack which aims above all at Latin.

Casini describes a Mass he had “the misfortune” to experience (pp62f):

…during which, in the midst of the commands peremptorily bellowed at the congregation—sorry, “assembly”—by the curate like any sergeant-major to the company on parade—Sit!… Stand!… Kneel!… Sing! All together!… the rite was solemnly interrupted to order an old lady to “put that thing away”—that thing being her Rosary, which, scarcely able to bear the new way of praying any more, she had taken out of her bag and clasped in her hands, to give her courage—in the eyes of the new-breed curate a more heinous act than producing lipstick and powder in church, and applying it.

Casini summarizes the mindset at work in the curate with the phrase, “If I don’t understand, I don’t pray.” Those behind the reform seemed to have no conception of how lay Catholics engaged spiritually with the Church’s liturgy, and did so fruitfully in terms of conversions, holiness of life, and perseverance under persecution. How could they get anything out of it? It was in Latin!

The same idea seems to be revealed in Pope Francis’ interview with a Spanish radio station. Traditionis Custodes, he said, took certain steps: “For example, that the proclamation of the Word be in a language that everyone understands; otherwise it would be like laughing at the Word of God.”Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Excuse me? The solemn proclamation of God’s words in Holy Scripture, perhaps chanted by the deacon at High Mass with candles and incense, before he takes the book to the celebrant to be reverently kissed by him – this is like laughing at the Word of God?

Chanting the Gospel to the north, in the direction of the pagans

And since the Psalms, too, are the Word of God, what does Pope Francis make of the Latin choral Office? On the idea that this could simply be done in the vernacular, Pope Paul VI, in one of his prophetic moments, exclaimed (in Sacrificium Laudis): “It is to be feared that the choral Office would turn into a mere bland recitation, suffering from poverty and begetting weariness.”

This is precisely what the Latin liturgy avoids – being inconditus: unmade, uncouth, bland; suffering from inopia: helplessness, poverty; and begetting taedium: weariness, boredom. It is not boring to hear the priest recite the prayers of the Mass, or to proclaim the readings, or to stand, almost silently, before the altar, whispering to the Host and Chalice, because it is something whose dignity and solemnity is evident. Casini quotes St Thomas Aquinas considering whether sung liturgical texts might be more difficult to understand, and therefore to be avoided: no, he says, because “even if they do not understand what is sung, they understand why it is sung, that is, in God’s praise, and this is enough to excite devotion” (Summa Theologica IIa IIae Q.91 a.2 ad5). In a word, the Latin of the ancient liturgy, and a thousand other features of the ancient liturgy rejected by the reformers, excites devotion, through its solemn character and evocation of the sacred.

An ounce of devotion is worth a ton of intellectual comprehension. And that statement could stand as a summary of the Traditionalist case for the preservation of our ancient liturgy.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Photos by Allison Girone, used with permission. 

Joseph Shaw, PhD

Dr Joseph Shaw has a Doctorate in Philosophy from Oxford University, where he also gained a first degree in Politics and Philosophy and a graduate Diploma in Theology. He has published on Ethics and Philosophy of Religion and has edited The Case for Liturgical Restoration: Una Voce Position Papers on the Extraordinary Form (Angelico Press). He is the Chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales and President of Una Voce International. He teaches Philosophy at Oxford University and lives nearby with his wife and nine children.

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Might Francis’s Love of Pro-Abort Biden, Castro Communism & his Amoris Laetitia/Anti-Death Penalty teachings Mirror how a Marxist Infiltrator might “fights… to protect Adulterers, Abortionists, Criminals, and Communists”?

January 20, 2022

There are usually only available a few copies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s [Francis’s] book “Dialogos Entre Juan Pablo y Fidel Castro [Dialogue between John Paul II and Fidel Castro]” and when they are available on Amazon it can be selling for a pretty penny.

The Spanish speaking Azel in his review of the book reported “[i]n my reading of the pope’s complex Spanish prose…”:

– “He favors socialism over capitalism.”

[…]

[And The Epoch Times reports] “communist infiltration hasn’t lessened since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. The left wing fights tooth and nail to protect adulterers, abortionists, criminals, and communists, while supporting anarchy and opposing civilization.” [https://www.theepochtimes.com/chapter-5-infiltrating-the-west_2562641.html]
Might Francis’s love of extremist pro-abortion Joe Biden, Castro Communism as well as his Amoris Laetitia and anti-death penalty teachings mirror how a Marxist infiltrator might smartly “fights tooth and nail to protect adulterers, abortionists, criminals, and communists, while supporting anarchy and opposing civilization”? – The Catholic Monitor

Francis’s book “Dialogos entre Juan Pablo II Y Fidel Castro” presents evidence that he is pro-Communist, anti-Capitalism and by inference Anti-American because the United States is the driving force behind the global free market system.

He wrote on page 23 that there apparently could be a “convergence” of “premises” between Communism and Catholicism:

“Fidel Castro offered a… convergence or points of connection between Catholicism and the premises (los postulados) of the [Cuban Communist] Revolution.”

However, later in the his book he states there cannot be a convergence of premises between Capitalism and Catholicism:

You cannot hold the premises (los postulados) of “neoliberalismo” (Capitalism) and be considered a Christian. The failures of Marxism and Collectivism don’t authorize the Capitalist system (al sistema capitalista)… we find in “neoliberalismo” (Capitalism) the opposite of the Gospel… because it empties man of the economic progressivism or economic progress (los progresos economicos).”
(Dialogos entre Juan Pablo II Y Fidel Castro, By Jorge Bergoglio, Copyright – Ciudad Argentina, Pages 48-49, Translation by Fred Martinez with the help of a Spanish to English dictionary)

In 2015, the Muslim global news source Al Jazeera in a article asked:

“Is Pope Francis some kind of Communist? Is he anti-American? Why is he so down on the wealth-creating engine that is global capitalism?”

The global news source answered those questions by saying “he [Francis] adhered to a diluted Argentine version of [Marxist] liberation theology.”

Al Jazeera actually quoted from Francis’s book without giving a source which is given above with my translation. It’s translation is:

“No one can accept the precepts of neoliberalism and consider themselves Christian.”

It appears that for Francis “neoliberalism” is a synonym for global Capitalism.

The global news source reported that Francis was anti-Capitalist and apparently anti-American since the driving force of global Capitalism is the United States.

Al Jazeera disclosed that in a disquieting screech, he reviled capitalism for “death and destruction” and having the “stench of the dung of the devil”:

“During a trip to [Leftist Socialist] Bolivia this summer, Francis delivered his most ferocious denunciation to date. Behind all the ‘pain, death and destruction’ wrought by unrestrained global capitalism, there lurks ‘the stench of the dung of the devil,’ he told a gathering of activists. ‘We want change, real change, structural change. This system is now intolerable.'”
(Aljazeera, “Liberation theology, once reviled by church, now embraced by pope,” September 22, 2015)

Are the unsound mental workings of Francis’s apparently unbalanced mind telling him that it was not the Russian Communists and the Chinese Maoist Communists (who are still in power) that committed the holocaust of tens of millions of human “death[s] and destruction” in historical concrete reality, but instead the Communist “holocaust” was committed by global Capitalism in the imagination of the seemingly crazy brain of Francis?

Does this craziness for “real change” to end “intolerable” American global Capitalism bring about Francis allowing without protest:

– the Communist Chinese regime to systematically attack the human rights of the Chinese Catholic underground Church, all the Christian denominations in China and even the Chinese Muslims?

– the human rights violations and starvation of the citizens of Venezuela by the Chinese Communist supported Venezuelan Leftist totalitarian regime?

And here is more evidence that Francis may be crazy for Communism:

 Jose Azel, a senior scholar at the University of Miami, in the respected international relations quarterly journal World Affairs wrote a review of a book by Pope Francis, which he wrote in 1998 while he was still the then Archbishop of Buenos Aires, which apparently Francis and Vatican don’t want publicized or read.

There are usually only available a few copies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s [Francis’s] book “Dialogos Entre Juan Pablo y Fidel Castro [Dialogue between John Paul II and Fidel Castro]” and when they are available on Amazon it can be selling for a pretty penny.

The Spanish speaking Azel in his review of the book reported “[i]n my reading of the pope’s complex Spanish prose…”:

– “he favors socialism over capitalism provided it incorporates theism…”

– “He does not take issue with Fidel Castro’s claim that ‘Karl Marx’s doctrine is very close to the Sermon on the Mount’… “

– “… and views the Cuban polity [form of government] as in harmony with the Church’s social doctrine…”

– “… Francis leaves no doubt that he sympathizes with the Cuban dictatorship…”

– “… and that he is not a fan of liberal democracy or markets…”

– “… He clearly believes in a very large, authoritarian role for the state in social and economic affairs…”

– “… his language in the prologue is reminiscent of the ‘liberation theology’… very intertwined [with] Marxist ideology. Fathered by Peruvian priest Gustavo Gutierrez, the movement provided the intellectual foundations that, with Cuban support, served to orchestrate’ wars of national liberation’ throughout the continent. It’s iconography portrayed Jesus as a guerrilla an AK-47 slung over his shoulder…”

– “… Francis speaks of a ‘shared solidarity’… that solidarity appears to be with the undemocratic, illegitimate authority in Cuba and not with the people…”

– “… Cubans will remember that this pope had a choice between freedom and authoritarianism.”
( World Affairs, “Whose Pope? Francis and Cuba,” Fall 2015)

The University of Miami senior scholar Azel in the article in his own translation of Francis’s book quotes him saying:

“[N]eoliberal capitalism is a model that subordinates human beings and conditions development to pure market forces… thus humanity attends a cruel spectacle that crystallizes the enrichment of the few at the expense of the impoverishment of the many.”

Might this craziness for “real change” to end “intolerable” American global Capitalism bring about Francis to be willing to communist regimes… strategies of psychological warfare and disinformation against Western countries”:

The Epoch Times in a series on Communist efforts at “Infiltrating [of] the West” explained how the program works:

Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB agent who defected to the West in 1970, discussed Soviet methods of subversion in his writings and interviews. According to Bezmenov, the James Bond-style spies of popular culture who blow up bridges or sneak around stealing secret documents couldn’t be further from reality. Only 10 to 15 percent of the KGB’s personnel and resources were allocated to traditional spy operations, with the rest going to ideological subversion.

Bezmenov, alias Tomas Schuman, said subversion happens in four stages: demoralization, destabilization, crisis, and “normalization.” The first stage, lasting for the period of time needed to raise a generation, is to demoralize and subvert public perceptions of reality in the enemy country; the second focuses on throwing society into chaos; and the third instigates a crisis that leads to a civil war, revolution, or foreign invasion. These steps culminate in the fourth and final stage of “normalization” — that is, bringing the country under communist control.

Bezmenov listed three fields of subversion, or demoralization, under the first stage: ideas, structures, and life. Ideas cover religion, education, the media, and culture. Structures include government administration, the legal system, law enforcement, the armed forces, and diplomacy. Life encompasses families and communities, health, and relations between people of different races and social classes.

As an example, Bezmenov explained how the concept of equality was manipulated to create unrest. Agents would promote the cause of egalitarianism, making people feel discontent with their political and economic circumstances. Activism and civil unrest would be accompanied by economic deadlock, further exacerbating labor and capital relations in a worsening cycle of destabilization. This would culminate in revolution or invasion by communist forces. [11]

Another defector, Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest-ranking intelligence officer to defect from the Soviet bloc, escaped to the United States in 1978. He further exposed how communist regimes adopted strategies of psychological warfare and disinformation against Western countries to bring about the first stage. According to Pacepa, the purpose of disinformation was to alter people’s frame of reference. With their ideological values manipulated, people would be unable to understand or accept the truth even when presented with direct evidence. [12]

Bezmenov said the first stage of ideological subversion usually took fifteen to twenty years — that is, the time needed for the education of a new generation — while the second stage took two to five years and the third stage, only two to six months. In an interview he gave in 1984, Bezmenov said the first stage had been accomplished to a greater extent than even Soviet authorities had expected.

The accounts of many Soviet spies and intelligence officials and declassified documents from the Cold War suggest that infiltration and subversion tactics were the driving forces behind the counterculture movement of the 1960s.

In 1950, McCarthy began to expose the extent of communist infiltration across the US government and society. But four years later, the Senate voted to censure him, and the government’s initiative to rid itself of communist influence was brought to a halt. Today, McCarthyism is synonymous with political persecution — an indication that the left wing has successfully established dominance in the ideological struggle.

Communist infiltration hasn’t lessened since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. The left wing fights tooth and nail to protect adulterers, abortionists, criminals, and communists, while supporting anarchy and opposing civilization. [https://www.theepochtimes.com/chapter-5-infiltrating-the-west_2562641.html]

Might Francis’s love of extremist pro-abortion Joe Biden, Castro Communism as well as his Amoris Laetitia and anti-death penalty teachings mirror how a Marxist infiltrator might smartly “fights tooth and nail to protect adulterers, abortionists, criminals, and communists, while supporting anarchy and opposing civilization”?

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes:  

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.  

What’s Behind The Boston Flag Case

Inbox

Catholic League pr@catholicleague.org via auth.ccsend.com	8:44 AM (4 minutes ago)
to me

What’s Behind The Boston Flag Case January 21, 2022 Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on oral argument before the Supreme Court on the Boston flag case: It is legal to burn the American flag in Boston (and elsewhere), and it is legal to display the flags of Communist nations in front of Boston’s City Hall, but it is illegal to raise a Christian flag in the same spot. That may be changing once the Supreme Court rules on this case in June. The justices recently heard oral argument on this case, and it didn’t go well for Boston officials. The position put forth by Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, representing Boston, appeared lame. Even some liberals on the high court seemed unimpressed. A closer look at what he said is troubling: it suggests that either city officials are badly educated on the First Amendment, or they harbor an animus against Christianity. City officials in Boston are used to people making requests to fly  celebratory flags outside City Hall. For example, Gay Pride flags are flown. Most of the requests, however, are to fly the flag of a foreign nation. Boston granted 284 consecutive requests until it finally said no to one. It said no to a man who wanted to fly a “Christian flag” (it bears a Latin cross). For the justices, the key issue was clear cut: either the flagpole represents a public forum where private parties can express themselves, or whether raising these flags conveys government endorsement of their message. If it’s the former, then city officials cannot deny the Christian flag from being flown; if it’s the latter, they can. The lawyer for the city argued that Boston would be endorsing Christianity if it allowed the Christian flag to be flown. He admitted that religious symbols are inscribed on some nation’s flags, but city officials believed that was different: the flag’s message was about the nation, not religion. But was he right to say that the establishment clause of the First Amendment prohibited the flying of a Christian flag? Justices Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch all indicated that it may be a “mistake” to see this issue as a violation of the establishment clause, and that if that is the case, then it ends the discussion. “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The latter clearly says that the government cannot stop the free exercise of religion. The former, according to Boston city officials, means that flying the Christian flag outside City Hall is tantamount to government endorsement of it. Are there really two clauses here, serving two different ends? That is what the city of Boston believes. But to the Framers, the two clauses serve to facilitate one end: religious liberty. That being the case, there is no need to “balance” one against the other, and it is wrong to see them as oppositional, as if they were written to cancel each other out. The article “an” is important. It takes on more meaning when we understand what Madison, who wrote the First Amendment, said about it. By “an establishment of religion” he meant a national church, such as the Church of England. In addition, he said, government could not show preference for one religion over another. That was it. From the oral argument, it is possible to deduce that Boston officials are using the establishment clause as a ruse: it may be that they are simply against the public expression of religion. Justice Samuel Alito noted that the original Boston policy on flag flying did not list any reasons why a request could be denied. After the Christian flag was denied, it was decided not to grant requests for flags that were “discriminatory, inappropriate or religious.” Alito charged that in doing so, “you’ve reverse engineered.” “We want to create an environment in which everyone feels included.” That is what the Boston attorney said. But by denying a Christian flag, does that not send a message that Christians are not included? The city’s lawyer also said, “Our goal is to foster diversity by celebrating the communities within Boston.” Justice Clarence Thomas jumped on this admission, saying, “You mentioned diversity several times, and what I don’t understand is your definition of diversity because it would seem to me that Christians in Boston would be a part of that diversity calculus.” The Boston case was made harder when several justices said the city’s policy amounted to “viewpoint discrimination.” What happened during oral argument is commonplace these days. The words “diversity and inclusion” roll off the lips of those on the left as a mantra. They mean nothing. They mean nothing because they rarely seem to apply to those who hold to traditional moral values. If anything, they are used as a weapon against them. In 1963, the Supreme Court, in Abington v Schempp, ruled that “the State may not establish a ‘religion of secularism’ in the sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion.” Seems apropos. The generous interpretation of this case is that Boston officials need to get up to speed on the meaning of the First Amendment. A less generous one suggests that their real goal is to censor the public expression of Christianity. Phone: 212-371-3191E-mail: pr@catholicleague.org

Conspiracies as Realities, 

Realities as Conspiracies

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

January 17, 2022

American politics over the last half-decade has become immersed in a series of conspiracy charges leveled by Democrats against their opponents that are happening because of them and through them. The consequences of these conspiracies becoming reality and reality revealing itself as conspiracy have been costly to American prestige, honor, and security. As we move away from denouncing realists as conspiracists, and self-pronounced “realists” are revealed as the true conspirators, let’s review a few of the more damaging of these events. 

Russians on the Brain 

Consider that the Trump election of 2016, the transition, and the first two years of the Trump presidency were undermined by a media-progressive generated hoax of “Russian collusion.”

The “bombshell” and “walls are closing in” mythologies dominated the network news and cable outlets. It took five years to expose them as rank agitprop. 

Robert Mueller and his “dream team” consumed $40 million of Americans’ money and 22 months of our time—to find the nothingburger that most of the country already knew was nothing. Yet the subtext of the 2018 Democratic takeover of the House was the media narrative that Trump, as Hillary Clinton put it, was an “illegitimate” president, due to Russian collusion. 

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper claimed on national television that Trump was a “Russian asset.” Former CIA head John Brennan assured the nation that the president was “treasonous,” due to his supposed “lies to the American people.”  

All sorts of politicians, retired military, and news anchors echoed the charges. The lies and myths of has-been British spy Christopher Steele made him a leftist hero. They were repeated ad nauseam as truth.  

FBI grandees like James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith, and others destroyed their careers in their obsessions over Trump. In the process of destroying themselves, they also nearly wrecked the reputation of the FBI. The Pentagon has the lowest popular support in modern memory. The CIA is more feared by millions of Americans than by our enemies. 

Steele could not produce any evidence to back up his scurrilous charges. The inspector general of the Department of Justice found little evidence to substantiate any of the charges. James Comey and Robert Mueller under oath both pleaded either memory problems or denied any knowledge about the FBI’s use of Steele and the role his fake dossier played.  

Most of the televised accusers, when under oath before Congress, admitted they had no evidence for their flamboyant charges. Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who claimed the dossier was authentic and that Trump was compromised, has repeatedly been revealed as a liar. In various televised House hearings, he kept getting caught either fabricating, misrepresenting, or warping evidence before his committee. 

No matter. Hillary Clinton and the Left kept pounding “collusion.” The more it was proven false, the more they shouted the lie.  

Finally, special counsel John Durham’s investigations, some authentic media investigative reporting, and the preponderance of evidence showed not only that Trump did not collude with the Russians, but that the entire charge was a sick sort of projection on the part of Hillary Clinton and her vassals.  

Steele concocted the election-cycle fantasy using a former Clintonite totem in Moscow. Another source was the now-indicted Igor Danchenko ( a “primary sub-source”), who was working at the leftist Brookings Institution while feeding Steele.

A cynic might look at this sad chapter and conclude that Hillary Clinton sought to destroy her opponent by paying Christopher Steele to manufacture fantasies fabricated from left-wing and former Clinton associates. Then she used the media, the FBI, the CIA, and the Justice Department to seed the farce while hiding her role behind three firewalls including the DNC, the Perkins Coie law firm, and Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS.  

The ultimate irony?  

Hillary Clinton did collude with those claiming to have Russian connections to warp an election, and she projected her likely illegal activity onto the target of her attacks. No conspiracist could trump such reality. Will Merrick Garland look at her role in this episode as he conducts his insurrectionist investigations concerning efforts to undermine an election? 

What was the post facto cost when such former “conspiracies” became realities, and former realities became the true conspiracies? The damage done was considerable. 

We once realistically used the Russians to balance the Chinese. But the Left, which appeased Vladimir Putin with “reset,” now flipped to create a climate of hate indiscriminately against all Russians. 

In this tortuous process from reset to collusion, we have empowered Putin among Russians as the heroic American resistor. We lost leverage against the Chinese. We ended up in a situation today where we are talking tough but are sinking in a quagmire of fake collusion, the Afghanistan debacle, the Biden train wreck of 2021, and the woke hysteria. All that is making the calculating Putin wonder whether U.S. deterrence is now a phantom. In other words, we look ridiculous. 

The Lab We Dare Not Speak 

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic, the level-4 security Wuhan Institute of Virology lab has been central to all narratives about the origins, nature, and spread of the pandemic.

There have been four cycles of these fantasies and realities. First came the frantic denials of a connection by the Chinese government, most of the Americana media, a consortium of scientists mostly dependent on Drs. Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci for generous support, corporate grandees with lucrative concessions in China, and the federal health apparat itself.  

Second, the iron-clad denial of a human-engineered virus waned by the weight of its contradictions. Evidence, at first circumstantial, later nearly overwhelming, seeped through the Wuhan denial wall of social media, traditional media, the Chinese government, and the U.S. establishment. Those interests all shared a common purpose of seeing Trump, the supposed Sinophobe, gone and the bat/pangolin fiction conspiracy seemed yet one more way to achieve this goal. 

A third phase then emerged, as the true role of Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance was revealed, as the pathetic international and Chinese-fed “investigations” collapsed in conflicts of interests, as interagency emails emerged from the CDC, NIH, and NIAID, and as a hothead, Dr. Fauci protested too much in his paranoid denials before the Senate of his role in any subsidized gain-of-function research. The American people and some media began to resist the intimidation and look at the evidence. 

Now we are at the fourth and final stage of the catastrophe. A once esteemed Fauci has been reduced to a cranky apparatchik. At best he will soon retire with some disgrace, and at worst he will be subject to years of investigation and litigation once his left-wing defenders in Congress, who once found him so useful, lose their majority. 

Most others who fiercely denied the human genesis of the supposed “bat” virus have either retired or resigned from their posts at the CDC and NIH. Democratic politicos have stopped slandering those who argued there was no natural origin to the pandemic.

Indeed, they are now parroting the once reviled advice of Dr. Scott Atlas. Stanford immunologists and epidemiologists are no longer smeared but quoted with approval. The Left now seeks to ease the lockdowns, to admit that thousands died “with” rather than “because” of the virus, and to concede that natural immunity is valuable. It agrees that there are therapies and carefully targeted quarantines other than just serial booster vaccinations and mass lockdowns to lower the death toll of the COVID strains and the never-ending mass quarantines. That Biden, not Trump, is suffering from the lockdowns offers added incentive to its revisionism. 

As the authority, power, and reputation of Fauci, Inc. waned, several scientists and government investigators are now liberated. They are demonstrating why the engineered virus is wholly different from its natural cousins, and why its manufactured nature is so infectious to humankind. We are getting close to learning, despite vestigial Chinese and U.S. government pushback, how SARS-CoV-2 was birthed, why it spread so quickly, and why so many denied its origins and nature. 

Pause for a minute and consider: The origins of the greatest pandemic since the 1918-19 flu—one that has killed millions, occurring at the zenith of global scientific progress, world cooperation, and technological achievement—were simply hidden from the global public.  

Worse, anyone with legitimate questions about the official Chinese and Fauci narratives of a naturally occurring bat or pangolin virus that leaped over to humankind, one with no relationship to the nearby Wuhan lab and without prior animal infections, was targeted for character assassination.  

Again, we are left with the real conspiracy that blamed the realists as conspiracists. The Chinese and Anthony Fauci played the role of Hillary Clinton, in accusing others of anti-scientific conspiracies as they wove scenarios that were dubious but aimed at aligning powerful figures in a conspiracy of sorts to smother the emerging and astounding truth of their culpability.

The January 6 “Coup” 

Finally, we come to the third case of projection, yet another conspiracy to create conspiracists.  

The January 6 riot was disgraceful. But it was a one-day spontaneous, chaotic, illegal entrance in and desecration of the Capitol by assorted buffoons.

We now know that even according to the FBI investigation—that was and is eager to prove a coup—January 6 was not a carefully planned putsch as Joe Biden so blatantly lied recently.  

New insurrectionist indictments—by Attorney General Merrick Garland in response to left-wing pressures—targeted a disorganized and psychodramatic group of self-important Oath Keepers wannabes and poseurs. In contrast, serious insurrectionists do not leave their guns behind to abide by strict D.C. firearms laws. They do not ride to their rendezvous at the Capitol in golf carts. And they do not stage an insurrection by being unarmed as they scatter about, yell, confront police, raise hell, and meander through the Capitol.  

If these had been serious insurrectionists, they would have followed the Antifa model: arriving stealthily in the many hundreds if not thousands, melting through crowds to assigned locations, in black with padded body armor, helmets, various clubs, and carefully coordinating their weeks-long and sustained violence on approved social media.  

Or if they were serious about using extra-legal means, they would (to take some non-random examples) encourage retired officers to pen a letter calling on the military to use force to remove a president and advocate in national journals that the military plan for a coup against the elected president, or write op-eds suggesting the president leave “the sooner the better,” or brag about a “conspiracy” and a “coup” of CEOs, who coordinate with the rich, with street activists, and with leftists to “stem the flow of information,” to modulate violence in the street, to flood voting precincts with subsidized ballot workers, and to warp the allotment of resources—and post facto brag in TIME magazine about the successful effort. Or finally, perhaps they would just do as Hillary Clinton did: advise their preferred candidate (as she did Joe Biden) never to accept a ballot count that goes other than his preferred way. 

Then there is the work of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who created a January 6 investigation committee. In an unprecedented move, she vetoed the House minority leader’s nominations to the committee. She instead picked her own. 

Only two Republicans were willing to serve. They had to fulfill her three criteria of voting for the Trump impeachment, of being so unpopular with Republican voters that their congressional futures will end in 2021, and being on record as praising Nancy Pelosi. 

The committee has one left-wing agenda: ferreting out any statement by an elected Republican official deemed too ambiguous about the riot being an insurrection. It seeks to cast them as Jefferson Davis-style Confederates, deserving of removal from Congress for plotting “insurrection,” along the Civil War standards of the 1868 14th Amendment.  

The committee members are not interested in reopening the investigation of the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt, a man who may not have ever been sufficiently interrogated by investigators.  

They seem indifferent to the likely presence and use of FBI informants.  

They care not a whit about the treatment of some uncharged suspects in solitary confinement or detained in primitive jail conditions. 

Nor are they concerned about the asymmetrical and weaponized federal reaction to January 6 when compared to general government indifference about the summer 2020 planned riots.  

As far as entering federal property to do damage to sacred sites, in May 2020 hundreds sought to break into the White House grounds, injured dozens of secret service agents, and posed such a threat that President Trump was removed to a bunker. All that is now forgotten.

Nor is the committee concerned about the role of prominent Americans in encouraging that summer’s violence, looting, arson, and rioting. 

Current Vice President Kamala Harris boasted during the summer 2020 riots that such organized violence would go on and on, and would and should not cease: 

They’re not going to stop. They’re not going to stop. This is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop. And everyone beware because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before Election Day and they’re not going to stop after Election Day. And everyone should take note of that. They’re not gonna let up and they should not.

Had Trump voiced Harris’ encouragement of street violence, he would now be indicted.

In investigating a supposed conspiracy, why does the committee conspire to ensure that thousands of hours of videos are not released that might give a more accurate picture of the culpable who prompted the Capitol riot, who participated, and the reaction of the Capitol police?  

Why conspire not to force the attorney general and FBI director in closed session to list all FBI informants involved in the riot or any intergovernmental law enforcement communications about their use?

Why not simply have a comprehensive investigation about 2020-21 domestic violence of all sorts, and begin with summer 2020 and continue to January 6?  

Why not allow the nominated Republicans skeptical of the official January 6 narrative to vie on the committee in the pursuit of truth with their opponents? Instead of equating the riot with the Civil War, Pearl Harbor, or 9/11, why not issue a report about the long history of violence in the Capitol to adjudicate comparisons with the January 6 riot? 

The answers are obvious. A midterm election looms in fewer than 10 months. Given Biden’s current historic unpopularity, given the failure of his policies, given generic anger at the Democratic Party, the campaign talking points are not going to be the border, Afghanistan, inflation, energy, race relations, or the build back better multitrillion-dollar fiasco.  

Instead, it will be Trump! “Democracy dies in 2022!!” and“January 6!!!”

Ponder the costs of this January 6 exaggerated narrative. The U.S. Army is now running war games designed to defeat fantasy right-wing domestic terrorists. The FBI is monitoring PTAs and schoolchildren’s parents. 

As it searches for “white supremacists” and uses indoctrination educational methods to ensure the end of “white privilege” and “white rage,” the military polls record lows in public support. More than half the country distrusts it. Efforts at recruitment are stalling, despite generous bonuses.  

Vaccination mandates apply even to those with acquired immunity from past infection and are also winnowing the ranks. The military failure in Afghanistan and its diversity, equity, and inclusion cannibalism have stirred China and Russia to recognize an opportunity. In tandem both now increasingly salivate over Taiwan and Ukraine.

January 6 has been used to slander anyone supporting voter IDs, which are common in Europe and most of the states.  

Joe Biden—who in his earlier career wished it known that officials like segregationist George Wallace, Fritz Hollings, and James Eastland were friendly to him—has a long history of racist “gaffes.” He knows he will either not be reelected, or will not run again, or he will be removed from office, or resign. For a failing Biden and a soon to be thrown out narrow congressional Democratic majority, it is now or never. 

The Costs 

The collusion, COVID-19, and January 6 narratives have been terribly costly to the nation.  

Conspiracy projection has split apart the country. The Left has fought efforts to learn the full truth, as they project conspiracies to disguise conspirators. 

They have grievously weakened the reputation and authority of the U.S. government here and abroad.

We are lectured that “democracy dies” if the Democrats lose elections and “voter suppression” requires drastic counteraction—even as the Left goes after the Electoral College, the nine-justice Supreme Court, the filibuster, the 50-state union, and the constitutional primacy of states to set voting laws. 

All this is as pathetic as it is fatal to the survival of the American project.

___________________________________________________

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Is Benedict’s “Summorum Pontificum (SP) a Failed ‘Experiment’” ? Or, as Ratzinger appeared to say, is the Francis/Paul VI Mass a “Failed ‘Experiment'” that even Betrayed the Vatican II Constitution?

December 31, 2021

The Council did not itself reform the liturgical books, but it ordered their revision, and to this end, it established certain fundamental rules. Before anything else, the Council gave a definition of what liturgy is, and this definition gives a valuable yardstick for every liturgical celebration. Were one to shun these essential rules and put to one side the normae generales which one finds in numbers 34 – 36 of the Constitution De Sacra Liturgia (SL), in that case one would indeed be guilty of disobedience to the Council! It is in the light of these criteria that liturgical celebrations must be evaluated, whether they be according to the old books or the new. It is good to recall here what Cardinal Newman observed, that the Church, throughout her history, has never abolished nor forbidden orthodox liturgical forms, which would be quite alien to the Spirit of the Church…

… The contradictions and oppositions which we have just enumerated originate neither from the spirit nor the letter of the conciliar texts. The actual Constitution on the Liturgy does not speak at all about celebration facing the altar or facing the people. On the subject of language, it says that Latin should be retained, while giving a greater place to the vernacular “above all in readings, instructions, and in a certain number of prayers and chants”(SL 36:2). – Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger

“Over and over again, the mantra of “let us wait and see” has allowed the aggressors to seize the initiative and control the narrative.  For example, since the release of TC, I have seen liberals defend it by calling Summorum Pontificum (SP) a failed “experiment.”  I have yet to find where Pope Benedict said SP is an experiment, yet where is the conservative push back?  Another example is when liberal writers (and bishops) refer to the Novus Ordo as the Mass of Vatican II.  In actuality, the opening Mass of the Council (in 1962) and the closing Mass (in 1965) were the Traditional Latin Mass.  Yet again, I have not seen (perhaps I missed it) any conservative commentator push back on this.  We should not let them get away with such blatant untruth.” – Founder of Coalition for Canceled Priests, Fr. John Lovell

Today, the founder of Coalition for Canceled Priests is fighting back against the “failed ‘experiment'” of Francis’s attack on the Traditional Latin Mass. 

Fr. John Lovell who was in “2012, while Father was studying at the Dominican House of Studies, he was removed/canceled by the new bishop of Rockford, David J. Malloy. For the last decade, Father Lovell has fought for his good name and has helped other priests in the same situation. In the spring of 2021, he co-founded the Coalition for Canceled Priests” reported LifeSiteNews.

Fr. Lovell said “faithful Catholic[s] [can] stand up and publicly protest a bishop in charity”:

Over and over again, the mantra of “let us wait and see” has allowed the aggressors to seize the initiative and control the narrative.  For example, since the release of TC, I have seen liberals defend it by calling Summorum Pontificum (SP) a failed “experiment.”  I have yet to find where Pope Benedict said SP is an experiment, yet where is the conservative push back?  Another example is when liberal writers (and bishops) refer to the Novus Ordo as the Mass of Vatican II.  In actuality, the opening Mass of the Council (in 1962) and the closing Mass (in 1965) were the Traditional Latin Mass.  Yet again, I have not seen (perhaps I missed it) any conservative commentator push back on this.  We should not let them get away with such blatant untruths…

…  “Can a faithful Catholic stand up and publicly protest a bishop in charity?”  The answer is certainly yes and if one reads The Code of Canon Law, the faithful at times even have the duty to do so (see Canon 212).  In light of this and anticipating that Cupich would soon crack down on the TLM, CFCP and its partners sent two billboard trucks to Holy Name Cathedral and four other parishes on Sunday, November 14, 2021.  To fulfill their duty to stand up for their Faith, the laity need first to be made aware of what is happening and then assured of their right to make their needs known.  It is part of the Coalition’s mission to assist them in both areas…

… While some believe submission is required due to obedience, and some think “feeding the crocodile will pacify the beast,” some attribute it to something else, and have compared the relationship between Pope Francis and traditional Catholics to that of an abusive parent to his children.  The behavior of some traditional Catholics fit this analogy perfectly; their reaction to any kind of protest is precisely the response an abusive child gives to an abusive parent.  The child, in the hope of stopping the abuse (in this case from Cupich), will try to placate the parent, avoid the parent, and cower to the parent.  Yet history shows the abuser will just keep abusing until someone says enough and steps in…

…  Yes, this can be done with respect and charity.  What I am not for is the attitude of “Unite the Clans! Except you and you.”  The Coalition has officially added defense of the TLM to its mission.[https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/why-the-coalition-for-canceled-priests-is-fighting-back-against-restrictions-on-the-latin-mass/]

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger before he became Pope Benedict XVI appeared to say that Pope Paul VI’s Mass is a failed experiment that even betrayed  the Vatican II Constitution. Moreover, he said against the current Francis attack on the Traditional Latin Mass that “the Church, throughout her history, has never abolished nor forbidden orthodox liturgical forms, which would be quite alien to the Spirit of the Church”:

It is without doubt possible that, within this area, there exist reasons which go further back than any theology and which have their origin in the character of individuals or in the conflict between different personalities, or indeed a number of other circumstances which are wholly extrinsic. But it is certain that there are also other deeper reasons which explain these problems. The two reasons which are most often heard, are: lack of obedience to the Council which wanted the liturgical books reformed, and the break in unity which must necessarily follow if different liturgical forms are left in use. It is relatively simple to refute these two arguments on the theoretical level. The Council did not itself reform the liturgical books, but it ordered their revision, and to this end, it established certain fundamental rules. Before anything else, the Council gave a definition of what liturgy is, and this definition gives a valuable yardstick for every liturgical celebration. Were one to shun these essential rules and put to one side the normae generales which one finds in numbers 34 – 36 of the Constitution De Sacra Liturgia (SL), in that case one would indeed be guilty of disobedience to the Council! It is in the light of these criteria that liturgical celebrations must be evaluated, whether they be according to the old books or the new. It is good to recall here what Cardinal Newman observed, that the Church, throughout her history, has never abolished nor forbidden orthodox liturgical forms, which would be quite alien to the Spirit of the Church. An orthodox liturgy, that is to say, one which express the true faith, is never a compilation made according to the pragmatic criteria of different ceremonies, handled in a positivist and arbitrary way, one way today and another way tomorrow. The orthodox forms of a rite are living realities, born out of the dialogue of love between the Church and her Lord. They are expressions of the life of the Church, in which are distilled the faith, the prayer and the very life of whole generations, and which make incarnate in specific forms both the action of God and the response of man. Such rites can die, if those who have used them in a particular era should disappear, or if the life-situation of those same people should change…

… The contradictions and oppositions which we have just enumerated originate neither from the spirit nor the letter of the conciliar texts. The actual Constitution on the Liturgy does not speak at all about celebration facing the altar or facing the people. On the subject of language, it says that Latin should be retained, while giving a greater place to the vernacular “above all in readings, instructions, and in a certain number of prayers and chants”(SL 36:2). As regards the participation of the laity, the Council first of all insists on a general point, that the liturgy is essentially the concern of the whole Body of Christ, Head and members, and for this reason it pertains to the whole Body of the Church “and that consequently it [the liturgy] is destined to be celebrated in community with the active participation of the faithful”. And the text specifies “In liturgical celebrations each person, minister or lay faithful, when fulfilling his role, should carry out only and wholly that which pertains to him by virtue of the nature of the rite and the liturgical norms” (SL 28). “To promote active participation, acclamations by the people are favoured, responses, the chanting of the psalms, antiphons, canticles, also actions or gestures and bodily postures. One should also observe a period of sacred silence at an appropriate time” (SL 30).

These are the directives of the Council; they can provide everybody with material for reflection. Amongst a number of modern liturgists there is unfortunately a tendency to develop the ideas of the Council in one direction only. In acting thus, they end up reversing the intentions of the Council. The role of the priest is reduced, by some, to that of a mere functionary. The fact that the Body of Christ as a whole is the subject of the liturgy is often deformed to the point where the local community becomes the self-sufficient subject of the liturgy and itself distributes the liturgy’s various roles. There also exists a dangerous tendency to minimalize the sacrificial character of the Mass, causing the mystery and the sacred to disappear, on the pretext, a pretext that claims to be absolute, that in this way they make things better understood. [https://adoremus.org/2007/12/ten-years-of-the-motu-proprio-quotecclesia-deiquot/]Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. SHARE

Please—Stop the Coup Porn

Military officers should quit all their coup porn talk—either to remove a president they don’t like, or to project their own reckless, insurrectionary behavior onto their political opponents.

By: Victor Davis Hanson

American Greatness

December 22, 2021

In a recent Washington Post op-ed, three retired generals, Paul Eaton, Antonio Taguba, and Steven Anderson warn of a supposedly impending coup should Donald Trump be elected in 2024. 

The column seemed strangely timed to coincide with a storm of recent Democratic talking points that a reelected Trump, or even a Republican sweep of the 2022 midterms, would spell a virtual end of democracy. 

Ironies abound.   

From Election Day in 2020 to Inauguration Day 2021, we were told by the Left that democracy was resilient and rightly rid the nation of Trump.    

The hard Left, for one of the rare times in U.S. history, was now in complete control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.   

Spiking inflation, supply-chain shortages, near-record gas prices, open borders, the flight from Afghanistan,  multi-trillion-dollar deficits, and polarizing racial rhetoric all followed. 

In response to these events, Joe Biden’s popularity utterly collapsed. His cognitive challenges multiplied the unpopularity of his failed policies.  

In reaction, the Left again pivoted. It suddenly announced that should it lose congressional power in 2022 or the presidency in 2024, democracy was all but doomed. 

Apparently, what changed Democrats’ views was that democracy was working all too well in expressing widespread public disgust . . . with the Left. 

Even more ironies followed. 

The three retired generals shrilly write of the dangers of insurrection and coups. Yet the FBI found no such insurrection or conspiracy in the buffoonish riot January 6. 

Only serial media misinformation and lies turned a ragtag band of misfits into an existential threat to the nation. 

Almost every media talking point turned out to be untrue. No Capitol police officer died at the hands of the mob. (Early reports that Officer Brian Sicknick had been beaten into a coma by protesters were incorrect. The Washington, D.C., medical examiner ruled Sicknick died the next day of a stroke.) The media all but ignored the lethal police shooting of a military veteran and unarmed petite female trespasser, for the apparent crime of trying to enter Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office through a broken window. There were no gun-toting “insurrectionists” arrested inside the Capitol. 

Another irony. The three retired generals say nothing about the Russia collusion hoax in which Obama Administration officials at the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the CIA helped to seed a fake dossier—paid for by candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Ex-British intelligence operative Christopher Steele’s made-up opposition research was designed first to derail Trump’s campaign, then to disable his transition, and finally sabotage his presidency. All that seems rather coup-like. 

In truth, coups were regularly discussed during the last four years—but only in the context of a by-any-means-necessary way of deposing Donald Trump extralegally before his term ran out. 

In August 2020, two retired officers John Nagl and Paul Yingling, urged Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley to remove Trump from office if Milley felt it necessary after a contested election.

Both officers knew that the law forbids Milley from interfering in the chain of command, given his mere advisory role to the president. 

Yet Milley himself had dangerously violated his purview at least twice. He once ordered subordinate officers to report to him first should Donald Trump consider any nuclear action against China. And Milley additionally called his Chinese communist counterpart to warn him that he would tip the Chinese off about any preemptive American strike on China.  

Earlier, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama Pentagon legal official, wrote a now-infamous essay in Foreign Policy, listing the choices available in removing Donald Trump from his less than the two-week-old presidency. Among the possible means, she listed a potential military coup.  

Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice forbids even retired military officers publicly attacking or disparaging their current commander-in-chief. Yet several retired generals and admirals serially did just that during the last administration, smearing their president in every imaginable way, from being a Mussolini-like fascist to a veritable Nazi. 

The officers published in the Washington Post are clueless as to why the military is now suffering its most dismal public approval ratings of the modern era—with only 45 percent of the public registering trust and confidence in their armed forces. 

The nation is not blaming the courageous soldiers in the enlisted ranks. But it has had enough of the Pentagon’s loud top brass who seem more interested in stirring up political divisions at home than adopting winning strategies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, or deterring China and Russia. 

The officer corps too often broadcasts its woke credentials, calibrated for career advancement. Top-ranking officers upon retirement too predictably head for corporate defense contractor boards and procurement lobbying firms. 

To restore the military’s reputation, officers should eschew politics to focus on restoring strategic deterrence and military readiness. They should keep clear of divisive domestic issues. They should stop virtue signaling to the media and influential members of Congress. 

But most importantly, officers should quit all their coup porn talk—either to remove a president they don’t like, or to project their own reckless, insurrectionary behavior onto their political opponents. 

___________________________________________________

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

Has Francis “incur[red] the Wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul” for his attack on Pope St. Pius V’s Traditional Latin Mass? 

December 31, 2021

Catholic pundit Ann Barnhardt quoted “Quo primum, the great document of Pope SAINT Pius V, issued on 14 July, ARSH 1570” that apparently declared Francis “will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul” for his  attack on Pope St. Pius V’s Traditional Latin Mass:

[The Francis Motu Proprio states in] Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.

Well, let’s see. Quo primum, the great document of Pope SAINT Pius V, issued on 14 July, ARSH 1570, said of the Tridentine Rite:

“We grant in perpetuity that this Missal is hereafter freely and lawfully to be used, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty or censure…

No one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”

From your lips to God’s ear, Pope St. Pius V. [https://www.barnhardt.biz/2021/07/16/antipope-bergoglio-abolishes-the-venerable-rite-of-pius-v-in-article-i-of-his-document-which-is-further-proof-positive-he-isnt-the-pope-quo-primum-is-explicit-the-pian-r/]

Catholic scholar Robert Higdon presented evidence that indeed St. Paul would not be happy with Francis’s Lutheran attempt to “destroy the Church” for “Luther stated: ‘destroy the Mass and you destroy the Church'”:

St. Paul says, “I have handed over that which I received.” He then explains what it is that he has received. What he describes is the Holy Mass. That the Lord, before he suffered, took bread saying “This is My Body which is given up for you. This is the chalice of My Blood,” etc. So when St. Paul says “hold fast to the traditions” and “I have handed over that which I have received,” he refersspecifically to the liturgy of Holy Mass…

… The sacred liturgy of the Mass is both Sacrifice and Sacrament. Holy Mass is ‘the Prayer’ of the Holy Church! Hence the venerable maxim “let the rule for prayer determine the rule of belief.” In other words: “what we pray at Mass determines what we believe!” The protestant reformers understood this concept well as Luther stated: “destroy the Mass and you destroy the Church.”

Could this be why Pius XII warned the Church of the suicide of altering the Faith in her liturgy! Could this be why St. Pius V when he canonized the Roman Rite, in Quo Primum, bound the Roman Church to the ‘Traditional Latin Roman Rite’ under the threat of the wrath of Almighty God, including the wrath of Peter and Paul ….Surely St. Pius V knew that to bind the Roman Rite under such a threat would not be possible if Holy Mass was only a discipline subject to radical change! 

Considering the liturgical chaos of today and the wholesale loss of faith everywhere, do you think we might be under the ‘wrath of almighty God’ that St. Pius V warned us about?

I would submit that if St. Paul were to appear on the liturgical scene today, knowing only what he knew at his death; that he would immediately recognize the Apostolic Tradition of the Latin Roman Rite; and therefore the legitimate successor to the Rite of St. Peter. I wonder if St. Paul would regard the Novus Ordo as illegitimate since it has neither Tradition for its father or Custom for its mother. [https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2645-on-the-rite-of-saint-peter-the-glorious-roman-rite-most-beautiful-thing-this-side-of-heaven]

Might Francis in some sense be possessed by the spirit of Martin Luther? 

Francis in his fixation with the devil and his Traditionalist enemies as well as feces and heresy appears almost to be possessed by the spirit of Martin Luther who never stopped talking about excrement and talking to the devil:

“”Devil, I have just s*** in my trousers. Have you smelled it?”
-Martin Luther
(Queenmobs.com, “Fecal Fridays: Martin Luther on the Toilet,” December 1, 2017)

Luther had continuous visions of the devil and of excrement as all Luther scholars know:

“The filthy language of Luther… a vocabulary of excrement… -against Satan… in his later years the violence and frequent obscenity… directed at his human foes.”
(“Martin Luther,” by Michael A. Mullet, page 338)

Besides the Francis’s fixation on the devil, his enemies and feces, it appears that Francis has, also, joined Luther in believing in the heresy of imputed grace justification.

Francis referring to Luther said:

“Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err.” (patheos.com/blog/scotticalt, “Pope Francis is Wrong about Luther and Justification,” April 5, 2017)

Theologian Dr. E. Christian Brugger and First Thing editor Elliott Milco agree that Francis’s grace/justification teachings in Amoris Laetitia and his Argentine letter apparently are condemned as heretical by the Council of Trent.

Milco in his article “Francis’s Argentine Letter And The Proper Response” counters Francis’s idea of grace with the infallible Catholic teaching which says:

Trent’s doctrine of infused grace said “that graces truly sanctify and liberates, and that baptized Christians are always free to fulfill the moral law, even when they fail to do so.”

Francis is denying the very concept of Catholic sanctifying grace and justification.

This is the greatest material error by any pope or antipope is the entire history of the Church.

It needs to be “loudly and forcefully condemned” or it will lead to apostasy and will destroy the vast majority of the Christian faith worldwide as it did in Luther’s Northern Europe up to the present day.

In 2017, Former Congregation for the Doctrine consultor Msgr. Nicola Bux under Pope Benedict XVI told Vatican expert Edward Pentin that Francis is spreading “apostasy”:

“Francis could stem the ‘confusion and apostasy”… by ‘correcting’ his own ‘ambiguous and erroneous words and acts.” (lifesitenews.com, “Only Pope Francis can end the ‘apostasy’ his words caused: Italian monsignor,” June 21, 2017) 

Francis isn’t ending the “apostasy.” Instead he appears to be joining Luther in attempting to “destroy the Church.”  
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. 

MeetNew meetingJoin a meetingHangouts

Rip’s NewsletterInboxRip McIntosh <newsletter@ripmcintosh.info> UnsubscribeSat, Jan 1, 4:15 PMto meJanuary 1, 2022___________________________________________________>Victor Davis Hanson   –   The Ungracious—and Their                                                     Demonization of the Past > Mark E. Meengs M.D  –  Current Thoughts on Covid 19___________________________________________________If I followed my usual practice of boldfacingsections I consider of particular importance, Dr. Hanson’s entire essay would so appear. I suggest it be read carefully and repeatedly, and shared widely  The Ungracious—and Their Demonization of the Past By: Victor Davis HansonThe Epoch TimesDecember 30, 2021 The last two years have seen an unprecedented escalation in a decades-long war on the American past. But there are lots of logical flaws in attacking prior generations in U.S. history.Critics assume their judgmental generation is morally superior to those of the past. So, they use their standards to condemn the mute dead who supposedly do not measure up to them.Yet 21st-century critics rarely acknowledge their present affluence and leisure owe much to history’s prior generations whose toil helped create their current comfort.And what may future scolds say of the modern generation that saw over 60 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, even as fetal viability outside the womb continued to progress to ever earlier ages?What will our grandchildren say of us who dumped on them over $30 trillion in national debt—much of it as borrowing for entitlements for ourselves?What sort of society snoozes as record numbers of murders continue in 12 of its major cities? What is so civilized about defunding the police, endemic smash-and-grab thefts, and carjackings?Was our media more responsible, professional, and learned in 1965 or 2021? Did Hollywood make more sophisticated and enjoyable films in 1954 or 2021? Was there less or more sportsmanship among professional athletes in 1990 or 2021?Was it moral to discard the “content of our character” and“equal opportunity” principles of the prior Civil Rights movement of 60 years ago? Are their replacement fixations on the “color of our skin” and “equality of result” superior?Would America have won World War II with the current labor participation rate of only six in 10 Americans working? Would our generation have brought all American troops home and quit World War I in fear of the deadly 1918 Spanish flu pandemic?Are we proud that most standardized tests of student knowledge and achievement continue to decline, despite record investments in education?Do we ever pause to consider that we enjoy our modern standard of living and security because we were once a meritocracy that quit judging our workforce by tribal affinities and ancient prejudices?Our generation talks of infrastructure nonstop. But when was the last time it built anything comparable to the Hoover Dam, the interstate highway system, or the California Water Project—much less sent a man back to the moon or beyond?If prior generations were so toxic, why do we continue to take for granted the moral and material world they bequeathed to us, from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to our airports, freeways, and power plants? Did we ever defeat anything comparable to the Axis powers or Soviet communism?We know the symptoms of the current epidemic of hating the past.One is Orwellian renaming and statue-toppling. Historical revision often responds to puritanical mob frenzies rather than to democratic discussion and votes of relevant elected officials.Where is the pantheon of woke heroes who will replace the toppled or defaced Thomas Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt?Whose morality and achievement should instead be immortalized? Were the public and private lives of Che Guevara, Angela Davis, Malcolm X, Margaret Sanger, and Franklin D. Roosevelt without sin?Racial fixations tend predictably in one direction. In good Confederate fashion, we lump all individuals who look alike into inexact collectives of “white,” “black,” or “brown”—often to stereotype the supposed evils of so-called white supremacy.But if we go down that tribalist and simplistic road of caricatured oppressors and oppressed, will future generations tally up each group’s merits and demerits, to adjudicate the roles of millions of individuals in making America worse or better?What standard would they use to judge our ignorant world of racial stereotyping—proportional representation in Nobel Prizes, philanthropy, scientific breakthroughs, or lasting art, music, and literature versus statistics on homicides, assault, divorce, and illegitimacy?Immigration—when legal, diverse, measured, and often meritocratic—has been the great strength of America, as typified by industrious arrivals who chose to abandon their homeland to risk new lives in the foreign United States.But if America is so flawed and so irredeemable, why in fiscal year 2021 are nearly 2 million foreigners now crashing its borders—illegally, en masse, and intent on reaching a supposedly racist nation that is purportedly inferior to those they abandon?According to the ancient brutal bargain, assimilation and integration grant the immigrant as much claim to America’s present and past as the native-born. But then shouldn’t the antithesis also be true?Shouldn’t immigrants at least respect those of the past who created the very country they now so eagerly desire, and died in awful places from Valley Forge to Bastogne to preserve?Never in history has such a mediocre, but self-important and ungracious generation owed so much, and yet expressed so little gratitude, to its now dead forebears.___________________________________________________

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

“Before the Epstein Scandal, There Was the Franklin Scandal” & Archbishop Sheehan who ordained Cupich who is Francis’s USA Right Hand Man 

January 04, 2022

The Epoch Times@EpochTimesAccording to Nick Bryant, the lack of transparency around #JeffreyEpstein and the #GhislaineMaxwellTrial isn’t the first time the #DOJ and #FBI have worked to cover up a pedophile network that catered to the country’s political and wealthy elite. [https://mobile.twitter.com/EpochTimes/status/1465846866155868165] In an interview with WMAQ-TV that same day, Cupich said “The Pope has a bigger agenda [than sex abuse cover-ups]. He’s got to get on with other things—of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the Church. We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this.” When asked about those criticizing the Pope, Cupich responded, “Quite frankly, they also don’t like him because he’s a Latino.”^[55] Cupich later stated that his remarks were not referring to abuse by clergy, which must be exposed, reported, apologized for, and ended. – Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blase_J._Cupich] 

Yesterday, Dinesh D’Souza wrote about the “conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell’ who was the main pimp for the “Jeffrey Epstein [international] pedophile sex ring”. He asked who were all the “most privileged circles of the world’s rich and famous” involved in this ring:

Was it sufficient for Epstein to be the provider of young girls, so that he would be initiated into one of the most privileged circles of the world’s rich and famous?

The critical question here is obviously: Who are these men? This is important to know because there are obviously a considerable number of very powerful individuals roaming around who are sexual criminals of the worst sort. These are not mere participants in a prostitution ring. Rather, they are pedophiles and sex predators who know full well that having sex with underage girls is a form of  rape, since those girls are not legally capable of giving free consent.

Epstein knew who those men are, but Epstein can’t talk, because Epstein was found dead in his cell. To this day, the circumstances are highly suspicious. The guards left their posts. The cameras were turned off or didn’t function. The guards then allegedly altered records to conceal their locations. Former Attorney [RINO George Bush and Opus Dei collaborator] Gen. William Barr said he’s satisfied, upon a review of the internal investigation, that Epstein hanged himself, but the results of that investigation have never been made public. [https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/sing-ghislaine-maxwell-sing_4189304.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2022-01-04&mktids=2164b04e22d32ab99628001bc4a429d5&est=Ac5ZY0UedtS98faP15XJ54xyaGpTIjqCgUmqx95QEKMsh1co6V71K%2BcbIPt2]

In November, The Epoch Times showed that the Epstein scandal mirrored the older Franklin scandal that involved the Catholic Boys Town which was part of the Archdiocese of Omaha, Nebraska:

On Dec. 4, demonstrators will rally in New York to protest what they say is a cover-up of the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell alleged pedophile network.

“The nonviolent, non-politically partisan demonstration will send a message to the Department of Justice that the American people will not settle for only Maxwell being indicted on one count of child trafficking, because the Epstein/Maxwell child trafficking network had multiple procurers and perpetrators,” event organizer Nick Bryant told The Epoch Times.

According to Bryant, this isn’t the first time the DOJ and FBI have worked to cover up a pedophile network that catered to the country’s political and wealthy elite.

He would know. One of the leading researchers on sex trafficking networks and child abuse, Bryant made his mark in the Epstein scandal when he obtained and eventually had published Epstein’s infamous black book—revealing the international financier’s numerous high-profile contacts.

But before that, Bryant came across another explosive document that would lead to his sweeping account of what’s now known as the Franklin Scandal—a child sex-trafficking ring that ran rampant throughout the United States in the 1980s…

… Bryant said the report suggests to him that the CIA quashed the investigation into the Finders. Up until that point, Bryant said he didn’t believe in the notion that a sex trafficking ring could operate with government knowledge—or even consent.

“That one document opened up my mind to entertaining ideas that I previously wouldn’t have entertained,” he said.

The Customs report would lead Bryant down a rabbit hole to Omaha, Nebraska, where another sex-trafficking ring was said to have been operated by the head of the now-defunct, eponymous Franklin Federal Credit Union.

Separate state and federal grand juries concluded in 1990 that the Franklin sex-trafficking allegations were a “carefully crafted hoax,” but Bryant’s work suggests that the DOJ and FBI worked to subvert investigations.

For instance, Bryant said the FBI pressured one of the victims, then-21-year-old Alicia Owen, to recant her allegations that she was trafficked by the Franklin network during her adolescence. When Owen refused, she was charged with 16 counts of perjury and served more than four years in prison—about two of them in solitary confinement.

“The authorities wanted to destroy her,” Bryant said.

Franklin victims eventually received some vindication in 1999, when U.S. District Judge Warren Urbom issued a summary judgment against the former Franklin head in civil proceedings. [https://www.theepochtimes.com/before-the-epstein-scandal-there-was-the-franklin-scandal_4130748.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=digitalsub&slsuccess=1]

Former state Senator John DeCamp in his book “The Franklin Cover-Up” wrote about how not only the FBI would do “nothing” to uncover the cover-up, but also the media and the bishop of Omaha:

In May 1992, shortly after the first edition of this book was published, Monsignor Robert Hupp, who had been the head of Boys Town from the late 1970s through the decade of the 1980s – the critical time in question for the Franklin case, contacted me and asked to have a meeting, at which he specified that witnesses must be present. I anticipated that his purpose was to attack me, and to deny what I had written about Boys Town.

I was completely wrong. With two witnesses present, Monsignor Hupp opened our discussion with the simple statement: “John DeCamp, your book stated the game; I hope I can help with some of the names.”

Monsignor Hupp and I then entered into an in-depth discussion on the entire situation involving Boys Town, Larry King, Peter Citron, the pedophile problem in general, and the entire story of the Franklin cover-up. He verified piece after piece of evidence of the Franklin story for me, and provided guidance on other directions in which to look, to develop further proof of the children’s stories of abuse by this country’s wealthy and powerful.

When I asked Monsignor Hupp how this ever could have happened at Boys Town, he looked at me and told me, so apologetically, “I am like the wife who did not know, and was the last to find out. And when I finally did suspect something and tried to act, the Archbishop [Daniel Sheehan] elected to do nothing about it, when I asked him to help. And then, when I came upon something horribly evil, I found public officials and the Church would do nothing – apparently terrified at the damage it would do to the Church and to the entire city of Omaha,” Monsignor Hupp said.

“What are you talking about?” I asked him. “Is there some particular story or incident you are talking about in the book that you have more information about? Please explain what you mean,” I asked the Monsignor.

He then described an incident in 1985, in which a young boy named Shattuck, who lived in Elkhorn, Nebraska, had been sexually abused and then killed. The Monsignor told me that he was certain who had killed the boy, a man he identified as a member of the Catholic clergy in the Omaha Archdiocese. Monsignor Hupp provided precise detail which he said proved beyond any doubt, that the particular individual he named was, in fact, the child’s murderer. {{ |”The Church is plagued by these sexual abuse problems across the country and by the devastating publicity the clergy abuse incidents have caused,” Monsignor Hupp explained. “The Church’s reaction to these sexual abuse problems is, in most cases, to immediately get the clergy member involved out of the state and, if possible, out of the country, and hopefully into treatment. I know that may not be right, but it is a difficult situation to deal with, and simply moving the priest or the brother out of the state or country has been the traditional approach by the Church in America to addressing the problems. In this case, where an innocent child was murdered and where I know that a member of our clergy has done this, I felt I had a moral obligation overriding all other things, to bring the situation to the attention of the appropriate authorities. And I did,” }} Hupp concluded.

The Monsignor then shocked me for the second time that day – and in a way that brought back to me the horrible memories of the Franklin cover-up.

He explained that after he determined that the Catholic Archbishop of Omaha was not going to take action on the case, he then went to the FBI and to the Omaha law enforcement authorities to provide complete details on the child’s murder.

So, what happened as a result of Monsignor Hupp’s actions?

Apparently, nothing. Each year on the anniversary of the child’s murder – now almost ten years – the media talks about the case as still being ‘under investigation’, and street rumors persist about the Catholic clergyman – the one Monsignor Hupp believes killed the child – who was shipped out of state for alcohol treatment right after the murder. In the aftermath of our meeting, Monsignor Hupp ran into his own problems. In September 1992, the Monsignor advised me that he was receiving all kinds of pressure and criticism and was, he feared, being forced to leave Boys Town.

Shortly after that discussion, in a controversy that received national press attention on how resources should be used at Boys Town, Monsignor Hupp was removed from his post. He now lives quietly in a home in West Omaha, Nebraska. Monsignor Hupp has shown incredible courage, as he has continued to provide me direction and assistance in the Franklin investigation and related matters.

Monsignor Hupp is not some 13 year old kid whom the cops say they cannot trust or believe. On the contrary, he is one of America’s most famous and nationally honored clergymen; the author of two best sellers; a former Presidential Appointee as Special Ambassador to the United Nations; and the former head of America’s most famous child care institution (Boys Town). Monsignor Hupp showed his courage yet again, when he repeated his charges a year later to a British TV team making a documentary on the Franklin cover-up, entitled Conspiracy of Silence. [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:The_Franklin_Cover-up]

Interestingly,  Archbishop Sheehan who did “nothing” to uncover the cover-up ordained Cardinal Blase Cupich who is Francis’s right hand man in the United States who said “The Pope has a bigger agenda [than sex abuse cover-ups]. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blase_J._Cupich and https://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/bcupich.html%5D

Ironically, speaking of a “bigger agenda,” Francis apparently is also involved in sex abuse cover-ups. 

On Jun 10, 2019,  Crux reported a “personal friend” of Francis was charged with “aggravated continuous sexual abuse”: 

“Argentine Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta… was charged with ‘aggravated continuous sexual abuse committed by a minister of a religious organization’…”

“[He was charged] by the prosecutor’s office in the Argentine northern province of Salta. The bishop was charged with “aggravated continuous sexual abuse committed by a minister of a religious organization. Zanchetta, the former bishop of Oran, was accused of “strange behavior” in 2015 when a diocesan secretary found pornographic pictures on the prelate’s phone. The images included gay porn featuring young men, but not minors, as well as images of Zanchetta touching himself. They were allegedly sent to unknown third parties.”
[https://cruxnow.com/church-in-the-americas/2019/06/10/argentine-bishop-at-heart-of-phone-porn-scandal-charged-with-abusing-seminarians/]

LifeSiteNews reported that “Zanchetta was a personal friend of the Holy Father”:

“[T]he words of the priest who signed the second document [testimony], “Zanchetta was a personal friend of the Holy Father.”
(LifeSiteNews, “Pope Francis knew of Bishop’s abuse years before Vatican posting, new document indicate,” February 27, 2019)

Francis’s “personal friend” Archbishop Gustavo Zanchetta, who apparently lives “in Casa Santa Marta, where Francis himself resides,” is a gay pervert according to the document.
(Lifesitenews, “Vatican sex abuse cover-up unravels as prosecutors home in on bishop protected by Pope Francis,” February 18, 2019)

That is unless the testimony on Zanchetta by Argentinian Church officials is only them lying through their teeth about the “personal friend” of Francis.

Is lying through your teeth about your boss’s “personal friend” something any normal person is going to do?

To put this situation in perspective, imagine President Donald Trump’s personal friend being a pervert who lived in the same residence as the president.

Or better yet, imagine you had a personal friend who was a pervert living in your residence.

What would that say about you?

Generally, most normal people’s personal friends who live in the same residence with them are like them in beliefs and lifestyle or they usually aren’t their friend nor living in their residence.

What does it say, if it is true, that Francis’s “personal friend” who apparently lives in his residence is a gay pervert?

Moreover, on September 24, 2018, LifeSiteNews reported that another “friend” of Francis was protected by him from a credible allegation when he blocked an investigation of a abused woman who credibly accused a group of priests including Francis’s friend Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor.

The woman, also, accused, among the group of priests, the pedophile priest Fr. Michael “Hill [of] abus[ing] her in the late 1960s, there were several other priests present and involved. She claims that Murphy-O’Connor was among them”:

“Pope Francis told Cardinal Gerhard Müller in 2013 to stop investigating abuse allegations against British Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, according to a highly-placed Vatican source who spoke to Marco Tossati. Murphy-O’Connor, as a member of the “Sankt [St.] Gallen mafia,” played a pivotal role in getting Jorge Bergoglio elected Pope in 2013.”

“…The lady who accused Murphy-O’Connor himself of abuse, claims that when Hill abused her in the late 1960s, there were several other priests present and involved. She claims that Murphy-O’Connor was among them. She, who then lived in what is now the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, had entered in the early 2000s into an agreement with the Diocese and received £40,000 payment for the abuse of Father Hill.”
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/blogs/source-pope-blocked-investigation-of-abuse-allegations-against-cardinal-who#ampshare=https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/source-pope-blocked-investigation-of-abuse-allegations-against-cardinal-who]

The website The Eponymous Flower summed up the Francis cover-up:

“Marco Tosatti, together with the Canadian news website LifeSiteNews, now raises serious allegations against Pope Francis. His gratitude to his great election victory went so far as to stop investigations by the Congregation of the Faith against Murphy-O’Connor. Tosatti refers to a ‘Vatican source’, which he describes as a ‘prominent former figure of the Roman Curia.’”

“The incident took place in June 2013, three months after the election of Pope Francis. The Prefect of the Faith, Gerhard Müller, was celebrating Mass with a group of German students when his secretary came to him and whispered in his ear that Pope Francis wanted to speak to him immediately. The Pope does not care if he is celebrating. He wanted to talk to him right now. In the sacristy, the Prefect of Faith met a “frustrated” Francis. He gave him the unequivocal order to immediately stop the initial proceedings against a friend of the pope.”
“The ‘Friend of the Pope,’ Tosatti said, was no lesser than Cardinal Murphy-O-Connor. There was an investigation against the former Archbishop of Westminister from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, of situation reported by a woman claiming to have been abused by a priest at the age of 13/14. For fifteen years she had tried in vain to draw attention to her case without being heard by the competent authorities. The highest competent body was Cardinal Murphy-O-Connor. Finally, she turned directly to the Congregation of the Faith in Rome.”[http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2018/09/pope-stopped-investigation-into-old.html?m=1]
Francis’s “friend” Murphy-O’Connor was not only “involved” in the credible allegation of the gang “abuse” of a girl “13 or 14 years of age,” but covered-up for the pedophile Hill:
“LifeSiteNews reached out to a reliable source from England who is very well informed about exactly that same lady who had been accusing the English cardinal. According to this English source, the lady has never gone public with her charges. But she has been in contact with Church authorities for about 15 years now, without ever having received a thorough investigation of her claims. This lady is already an acknowledged abuse victim, having received a settlement from the Archdiocese. She had been abused, when she was 13 or 14 years of age, by Father Michael Hill.”

“The pedophile Father Hill was imprisoned for five years in 2002 for abusing three minor children between 10 and 14. He had previously been imprisoned, in 1997, also for abusing children. He is thought to have attacked about 30 boys between his ordination in 1960 and the late 1980s. As The Guardian put it at the time: “His case is particularly notorious because the church’s leader, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, gave him a post despite warnings that he had abused young boys.” Hill had been moved to different parishes, in spite of the ongoing complaints of parents. Finally he underwent therapy in the 1980s.”

“Murphy-O’Connor, then bishop of the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, had appointed Hill in 1985 and made him chaplain at Gatwick Airport. Hill then was charged with abusing a teenager with learning difficulties who had missed a flight and was visiting the airport’s chapel.”

‘As later reports showed, Murphy-O’Connor had been warned by therapists that Hill would be abusive again. Murphy-O’Connor accepted that the diocese should pay compensation to those victims of Hill, but requested their silence on the matter of their abuse. Murphy-O’Connor had also been accused of trying to pay hush money to Father Hill – some £50,000 to buy his silence when he was released from prison. Murphy-O’Connor “utterly” denied that claim. It was said that a junior bishop made the offer on his behalf during a visit to Hill’s Belmarsh prison in London.”

“… As The Guardianputs it: ‘A few months after his election, the former Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio was apparently lightheartedly to credit Murphy-O’Connor, when the two met at a papal audience. The pope pointed to his old friend and said, ‘You’re to blame!’”

Murphy-O’Connor, it became clear, was an old friend of Bergoglio. As The Guardian‘s obituary states, Murphy-O’Connor called Pope Francis ‘my man’: ‘And, of course, his [Murphy-O’Connor’s] presence in Rome in 2013 [was in order] to witness the election of his friend as Pope Francis. He looked on in pleasure at the impact made by the Argentinian whom he liked, jokingly, to refer to as ‘my man.””
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/blogs/source-pope-blocked-investigation-of-abuse-allegations-against-cardinal-who#ampshare=https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/source-pope-blocked-investigation-of-abuse-allegations-against-cardinal-who]

Leo Zagami, the Italian author of a book on Francis called “l’Ultima Papa?,” also possibly may have connected some more dots in another cover-up case involving Cardinal Godfried Danneels who is seemingly another person who helped Francis:

Cardinal Coccopalmerio, who is a key figure in this network of liberal perverts, is a member of the Congregation for the Doctrine since 2010, and is not only a staunch supporter and elector of Pope Francis, but was also a member of the secret and irregular Masonic Lodge known as “The Mafia of San Gallo” ( the St. Gallen Mafia), that has conspired for years behind the scenes, for the progressive and liberal take over of the Church, in a series of secret meetings, that took place in the town of San Gallo in Switzerland, headed by the late Jesuit Cardinal and Freemason, Carlo Maria Martini, described in detail in a biography by Jürgen Mettepenningen and Karim Schelkens, dedicated to the now retired Cardinal Godfried Danneels, who has been heavily criticized for trying to dissuade a victim of sexual abuse from denouncing his perpetrator, a Bishop who was the uncle of the victim, and for this reason during the 2013 Conclave in Belgium, there were those who wondered if he was eligible to even elect the new Pope.

Cover of Godfried Danneels biography by Jürgen Mettepenningen and Karim Schelkens

Godfried Danneels admitted himself to be part of “The Mafia Club of San Gallo” in a public conference available on video:

https://nieuws.vtm.be/binnenland/159605-danneels-zat-soort-maffiaclub

Even the Italian press realized the importance of this book, and what the Cardinal defined as the “Mafia Club”, and decided to write about it in an article published in 2015, in one of Italy’s most popular newspapers, La Stampa: http://www.lastampa.it/2015/09/24/blogs/san-pietro-e-dintorni/francesco-elezione-preparata-da-anni-PAu2giegWwslaElPmNfC1L/pagina.html

 So Bergoglio under pressure from what is known as “the San Gallo Mafia” which helped him to get elected in 2013, declined to renew Gerhard Ludwig Müller’s mandate, and conveniently replaced him with his deputy, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, 73, a Jesuit. [https://leozagami.com/2017/07/11/jesuit-and-pedophiles-take-over-the-catholic-faith-guided-by-a-secret-masonic-lodge/]
Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. Pray an Our Father now for America. Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

“Ivermectin: Early, often, and full bore… the following is not medical advice, I am just relating what I did” & “Dr. Robert Malone Posts Irrefutable Proof on Ivermectin”

January 17, 2022

 

 

Dr. Robert Malone Posts Irrefutable Proof on Ivermectin and the Uttar Pradesh India Success Story

Thanks to Mark and Ann for letting me post the whole Ivermectin piece on the FM Report and here at The Catholic Monitor:

Ivermectin: Early, often, and full bore

non veni pacem

The Splendor of Truth

Ivermectin: Early, often, and full bore

Posted on January 14, 2022

Cross-posting here a letter AB received. The points are spot on, and coincide with my own experience. I was already taking the preventive protocol, of course, but I did not start the amped up “early treatment” dosage of 0.6mg/kg of body weight until Day 3 of the coof, because I didn’t think I had the coof. That was stupid of me. DON’T WAIT. Amp up the dose. The following is not medical advice, I am just relating what I did: 14 straight days at the higher dose (alternating 0.4-0.6mg/kg)… folks, for my 250 frame, that is a full HALF TUBE of pony paste every day. Your instinct will tell you it’s too much, but it’s fine. Maybe a little blurry vision at worst. If you absolutely insist on getting the oral tablets and overpaying, then by all means get on alldaychemist and order the 100 tabs of 12mg each and pay $112. It will arrive from India in three weeks. But Jeffer’s Equine will get you the past in five days for $6 a tube. If you wait until you get sick, forget it.

---

Mailbag: DO NOT HESITATE with the Ivermectin.

Ann,

I want to ask you to please remind your readers not to be afraid to pull 
the trigger on actually using Ivermectin as soon as you suspect you have 
Covid.

My wife and I, and two very close friends and their wives, all got Covid
at the same time, but not from each other.  We were all prepared with
Ivermectin.  My wife is 70 years old, and I’m 63. We took ours even
before we had the test results, and both of us recovered in under 4
days.  My wife had a fever for less than a day, and the sniffles for a
few days.  I had a fever for about 3 days and then felt better, although
my cough lingered at a very low level for about 2 weeks.

On the other hand, one friend and his wife struggled through it for a
week before taking the Ivermectin.  He ended up in the hospital for 2
weeks, and has been struggling with breathing ever since.  He is very
athletic, and was in excellent physical condition, having trained
assiduously for the ski season.  Now he can barely walk across the room
without getting winded. Fortunately he is improving, but it’s been very
difficult.

My other friend and his wife also hesitated to pull the trigger until it
was too late.  She has a comorbid lung condition and is still
recovering, but her husband, my close friend, was overweight and
diabetic.  He passed away a week before Christmas.  Not only did they
hesitate to take the Ivermectin, but they did not have enough.

I asked them both why they hesitated, and it was because of the cost.
The Ivermectin I got (human, not farm), is $115 per box, each box being
24 pills, 6 mg each [Price gouging – that’s $0.80 per milligram. At that price, the 500mL bottles of the 1% injectable solution that I buy and give away, which contain 5000 milligrams of Ivermectin per bottle, would have a street value of $4000. -AB]  For me, it takes about 1 1/2 boxes for a full
course of treatment.  So it’s not cheap, and I understand why they
wanted to keep it “until they really need it.”  What they didn’t realize
is that the time “they really need it” is as soon as they think they’ve
got it, even before the test results come back.

Please emphasize EARLY treatment!

Also, I work for a health system in the Mid-Atlantic area.  I see the
Covid stats in our hospitals multiple times per day.  I’ve been watching
the relative percentages of “vaccinated” vs. “unvaccinated” patients
with Covid in our hospitals for months.  Back in early December, the
percentage of “vaccinated” patients with Covid in our hospitals was
hovering between 25% and 30%, with under 5% of them requiring ventilation.

Boy has it changed!  There has been a dramatic spike in patients
admitted WITH Covid (not FOR Covid).  We have about 500% more patients
with Covid than we did at the beginning of December.  But the real
story, as far as I am concerned, is that the relative percentages of
“vaccinated” vs. “unvaccinated” have dramatically shifted.

As of this morning, 50% of our Covid patients are “vaccinated” and 50%
are “unvaccinated”.  Out of all the Covid patients in the ICU, 37% are
“vaccinated”.  Out of all the patients on ventilators, almost 40% are
“vaccinated”.  This is from a sample size of about 600 patients.  Also,
as the percentage of “vaccinated” Covid patients has risen, so has the
percentage of ventilator patients who are “vaccinated”.  Now the
percentage of “vaccinated” Covid patients on ventilators is 8%.

Practically every clinical person in this health system sees these
numbers every time they log into the Electronic Medical Record.  So they
know what’s happening.  There’s no way they don’t.

“A pandemic of the unvaccinated” is a bunch of horse s***!

Thanks for all the good work you do.  If you choose to publish any of
this information, please do not use my name.

Sincerely,

X

p.s., My friend who died received Last Rites and the Apostolic Pardon.
Praised be Jesus Christ!

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.