THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

“Dreaded Delta” COVID Lies, “Propaganda Bots” & “Your Strongest Defense is a Religious Exemption” against Death Vaccine 

August 03, 2021

Today, renowned statistician Dr. William Briggs, who is a consultant and adjunct Professor of Statistics at Cornell University with specialties in medicine and philosophy of science reported on the “Dreaded Delta” COVID Propaganda lies of our elites and their “Propaganda Bots”:

LIES APLENTY

Here’s a screenshot (for when Twitter censors delete the original) showing lying is now official policy.

There are many more of these (do your own search, though after its exposure there are now many jokes). They all appear to originate with a Blue Checka calling himself “Sam Ghali, M.D.”.

I just left the ER.

We are officially back to getting crushed by COVID-19.

Delta Variant is running rampant and it’s MUCH more transmissible than the original virus.

99% of our ICU admits did NOT receive a vaccine.

Virtually ALL of them wish they had.

— Sam Ghali, M.D. (@EM_RESUS) July 22, 2021

His follow-up tweet right below this on 22 July says, “Just to give you some better insight into what is actually happening right now, we currently have MORE patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 than we’ve had at ANY other time since the pandemic began.”

People just can’t help but lie (see below for why we know it’s a lie). Even doctors. We saw this, too, in “Officer Dunn” who told Congress about the 6 January rally:

“One woman in a pink MAGA shirt yelled, ‘You hear that, guys, this nigger voted for Joe Biden!’ Then the crowd, perhaps around 20 people, joined in, screaming ‘Boo! Fucking nigger!’

This lie is just as in-your-face as Ghali’s. Since no one can question a black without being called a racist, and no one can question a doctor without someone saying “Are you a doctor?”, whoever is in charge of us knows they can get away with it.

Also, the need to be part of the story is overwhelming. Long-time readers will recall I had an exchange with another doctor back in March of 2020, who said he was “surrounded by death” because of the coronadoom in Seattle. This was at a time when the total attributed deaths for the entire state of Washington was in the single digits. When I called him on it, he deleted the tweet (and I neglected to save a screenshot).

Whoever is behind the bots thought the lie from the doc looked especially scary, and off it went. We’ve seen these bots before, and we’ve asked the question “Who is behind them?” without receiving any answer. [https://wmbriggs.com/post/36809/]

Moreover, constitutional lawyer Scott Lively is saying “Your Strongest Defense is a Religious Exemption” against Death Vaccine: Your Strongest Defense is a Religious Exemption. Register your sincere religious objection to forced medical treatments including the “vaccine” and we will provide you a personalized copy of the letter below. Until now we have only issued these letters upon request for those actually under pressure by a school, workplace, or other authority, BUT we are changing that policy to automatically supply one to each person who registers. The registration form includes an option to donate to FCBC, and we will use those donations to continue standing firmly for the Biblical and Constitutional Right of Personal Sovereignty in Medical Decisions.
REGISTER YOUR SINCERE RELIGIOUS OBJECTION TO THE COVID 19 “VACCINE” HERE
And please spread the word about this resource to help as many believers as possible more effectively resist these tyrannical mandates. We cannot make any guarantees, but this letter, backed by the intervention of your attorney (if needed) offers the best possible chance of backing down over-zealous authority figures trying to force you or your friends and family members to violate your religious rights. Ultimately we assume the legal battle will be decided (for good or bad) by the US Supreme Court, even though the moral and spiritual battle will continue for those who hold to the higher law of God. [Scott Lively’s Mission Dispatch, August 1, 2021, Observations and Action on Current Events, History and Theology.Subscribe HERE] 

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do 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 –  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.

New NPR Policy Demands End To Funding August 3, 2021 Catholic League president Bill Donohue calls for defunding National Public Radio (NPR): The time has come to defund National Public Radio (NPR). Its latest policy directive to employees removes any pretense of its objectivity. In July, NPR rolled out its revised ethics policy. Its public editor, Kelly McBride, said it “eliminates the blanket prohibition from participating in ‘marches, rallies and public events,’ as well as vague language that directed NPR journalists to avoid personally advocating for ‘controversial’ or ‘polarizing’ issues.” What changed? The riots of 2020. Kelly cites several examples of the kind of activism that fuels NPR. Black Lives Matter is mentioned, along with other references to racially charged news events. Indeed, in anticipation of questions from NPR reporters, she rhetorically asks, “Is it OK to march in a demonstration and say, ‘Black lives matter?’ What about a Pride parade? In theory, the answer today is, ‘Yes.'” [Notice she did not choose a pro-life rally as an example.] “Protests organized with the purpose of demanding equal and fair treatment of people are now permitted,” Kelly says, “as long as the journalist asking is not covering the event.” In practice, however, this is untenable. Even if a journalist who joins a Black Lives Matter or Antifa protest does not write about it, who is going to stop this person from writing about counterprotesters? Moreover, if an employee has had an abortion, would that stop her from covering the subject?   To show how utterly void of professional journalistic ethics NPR is, consider what its chief diversity officer, Keith Woods, had to say about conflicting opinions held by NPR employees about this issue. He says the views range from “people who would go so far as to use the word ‘objectivity,'” to those who are the “burn-it-all-down kinds of folks.” Those who would “go so far as to use the word ‘objectivity'”? Wow. That’s really pushing it. Apparently, there are still some dinosaurs at NPR who believe it is their professional duty to be as objective as they can! They have obviously been crowded out by the “burn, baby, burn” folks. Then there is the nagging issue of NPR’s anti-Catholic history. Here are some examples. 1997: On July 5, the Weekend Edition aired a segment with host Scott Simon and musical satirist Tom Lehrer that featured Lehrer singing “The Vatican Rag.” It disparaged Catholicism and the Eucharist, including the doctrine of Transubstantiation.2005: NPR questioned the religion of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. NPR’s Lynn Neary wondered that since he is a Catholic whether “that might affect the way he views an issue like abortion, for instance.” Nina Totenberg of NPR even went so far as to say that his wife was “a high officer of a pro-life organization. He’s got adopted children. I mean, he’s a conservative Catholic.”2006: During the Easter season, NPR twice took aim at the divinity of Jesus.2006: Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to Turkey was used by NPR as an occasion to lecture the pope on being sensitive to Muslims by not making any overtly Catholic comments or gestures. It cited prayer and kneeling as examples.2007: When Samuel Alito was nominated to the high court, NPR’s Dahlia Lithwick said, “People are very, very much talking about the fact that Alito would be the fifth Catholic in the Supreme Court if confirmed.”2008: Utah’s NPR station, KCPW, featured a skit, “Fair Game with Faith Salie,” that mocked Jesus and the Eucharist.2012: Barbara Bradley Hagerty did a piece that was posted on NPR’s website that said a Philadelphia priest accused of raping a minor was “not that unusual” for a member of the Catholic clergy.2013: A movie, “Paradise: Faith,” depicted a “devout” Catholic woman who masturbates with a crucifix as she is making love to Jesus. It was highly recommended by NPR.2014: An NPR game show, “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me!”, made fun of Jesus dying on the Cross. Sexual references to Jesus were also made.2019: Wisconsin Public Radio ran a story on sexual abuse in the Catholic Church that gave the impression that nothing has changed, even though practically every “new” case involves allegations from decades ago. It also reported as factual information taken from a grand jury report, never telling listeners that these were all allegations, not proven instances of abuse.2019: NPR’s new style guide instructed reporters to stop using terms such as “fetal heartbeat,” “partial-birth abortion,” “abortion doctors,” and “abortion clinics.” It even went so far as to ban the word “unborn,” claiming that “Babies are not babies until they are born.” This is the kind of bias that NPR evinced before its new ethics policy was promulgated. We can only guess how bad things will become now that its reporters can engage in direct activism with impunity. We are contacting all members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees asking that they defund NPR. You can help by contacting the ranking minority members of the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittees of the Appropriations Committees in Congress. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting funds NPR and its appropriation originates with these subcommittees. Both Sen. Blunt and Rep. Cole are strongly pro-life. Contact Sen. Roy Blunt’s Legislative Director, Dan Burgess: Dan_Burgess@Blunt.senate.gov Contact Rep. Tom Cole’s Legislative Director, Joshua Grogis: joshua.grogis@mail.house.gov

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

St. Alphonsus dei Liguori, St. Bellarmine & Bp. Gracida: “A Doubtful Pope is No Pope” 

August 02, 2021

Bishop Rene Gracida summed the situation we are in with the doubtfulness of the Pope Benedict XVI resignation: 

“[I]f the [Pope Benedict XVI] Renunciation is doubtful, then in virtue of canon 332 §2, it is invalid for lack of due manifestation”
[https://abyssum.org/ ]

Moreover, it appears that if someone has definite solid reasons from canon law to doubt the validity of Pope Benedict’s resignation one can it appears possibly commit a sin if he doesn’t resolve that doubt before claiming Francis is definitely pope.

The important theological book “Rodriguez and the Confession of Doubtful Mortal Sins” in page 225 says:

“If one does not resolve the doubt and deliberately does the action anyhow, it means that he is willing to offend God gravely, and therefore he commits a mortal sin.”
(Google: Theological Studies -cdn- 1 PDF by U. Adelman – Cited by 1 Related articles)

Moreover, Dogmatic theology scholar Fr. Elwood Sylvester Berry (1879-1954), who was professor at Mount St. Mary’s Seminary in Maryland, in his apologetic and dogmatic treatise which according to his introduction “was originally written in Latin” stated that according to Doctor of the Church St. Robert Bellarmine: “a doubtful pope is no pope… ‘if a papal election is doubtful for any reason'” therefore a imperfect council of bishops is needed:

“Hence the saying of Bellarmine: a doubtful pope is no pope. ‘Therefore,’ continues the Cardinal, ‘if a papal election is really doubtful for any reason, the elected should resign, so that a new election may be held. But if he refuses to resign, it becomes the duty of the bishops to adjust the matter, for although the bishops without the pope cannot define dogma nor make laws for the universal Church, they can and ought to decide, when occasion demands, who is the legitimate pope; and if the matter be doubtful, they should provide for the Church by having a legitimate and undoubted pastor elected. That is what the Council of Constance rightly did.'” 8
(The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise, By Rev. E. Sylvester Berry,  Page 229, Note 8: Bellarmine, “De Concilio, ii, 19)

Latin Language expert Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s detailed why Pope Benedict’s resignation may be doubtful according to St. Alphonsus dei Liguori:

https://fromrome.wordpress.com/2020/01/05/why-saint-alphonsus-dei-liguori-would-say-the-renunciation-was-invalid/

Why Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori would say the Renunciation was invalid

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo
The Saints who have been canonized are already in the glory of Paradise, and so, baring an extraordinary grace, do not speak to us anymore. But those Saints who have fully explained their opinions or teaching on any point, can be said to speak to us today. This is especially true of Saints who have taught on questions of law and the principles to be followed in controversies.  Of which kind is Saint Alphonsus dei Liguori, Doctor of the Church on all questions of moral theology, and not a few questions of law.

No one has the right to interpret a Papal Resignation

As I reported in my notes for my meeting with Bishop Arrieta, Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legal Texts — who is the top Vatican official for questions of legal interpretation — he emphatically declared, that no one has the right to interpret a Papal Resignation. It must be clear in itself.

This statement by Bishop Arrieta clears up the entire controversy over the renunciation of Pope Benedict. Because, it ends it.  That is, since Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministerium, not anything else. No one has the right to say that he renounced the Papal Office or petrine Munus or even power of governance.  Because to say that something else, requires an interpretation. And no one, not even the man who is the pope, has the right to interpret the act of renunciation.

But the statement of Bishop Arrieta is not of his own making. It is the necessary conclusion of legal principles.  First, that a declaration made by the man who is the pope, inasmuch as he is the man, and not the pope, cannot be judged by anyone except according to the norm of law. And since a declaration by such man when regarding the renunciation of the Office regards the renouncing of the Office, one cannot appeal to the holder of the office to interpret it. Because if it was valid, then the holder is no longer the holder, and thus cannot receive appeals. If it was not valid, then appealing to the holder of the office is tantamount to declaring the renunciation in valid.

Any appeal to Pope Benedict XVI to clarify what he meant means that the Resignation is invalid

This is a very important point, which has been overlooked in this 7 year controversy. Anyone who appeals to anything which Pope Benedict said before or after Feb. 28, 2013, to explain that the Renunciation means the renunciation of the papacy, or of the petrine munus, or of the power of governance IS IMPLICITLY AFFIRMING THAT POPE BENEDICT IS STILL THE POPE AND THAT THE RENUNCIATION WAS INVALID, because they are trying to have recourse to an official interpretation. And if the act needs to be interpreted, then it is doubtful. And if the renunciation is doubtful, then in virtue of canon 332 §2, it is invalid for lack of due manifestation.

What Saint Alphonsus says about the interpretation of a law:

For those who have overdosed on the falsehood of universal acceptance, and quote Saint Alphonsus, let us see what the Saint would say about the games the authors of such sophisms play with the words “munus” and “ministerium,” to make the Resignation say what it does not say.  For this we must have recourse to the teaching of Saint Alphonsus, taken from his great work, Theologia Moralis, Bk. I, tract ii, p. 242, De interpretatio legis. I will first quote the Latin, for those who can read Latin, and then give an English translation:

DE INTERPRETATIO LEGIS

 200. Interpretatio alia est Authentica, alia Usualis, alia Doctrinalis. Authentica fieri potest vel ab ipso legislatore, vel ab eius successore, aut a superiore. Usualis est illa, quae ita ab usu est recepta. Doctrinalis autem est declaratio quaedam mentis legislatoris, quase a quocumque doctore fieri potest.

 Hic dubitur an delcarationes, quae fiunt a Pontifice, vel a principe alicuius legis, indigeant promulgatione, ut obligent. In hoc distinguere oportet declarationes pure tales ab aliis quae sunt non pure tales, sed potius sunt merae interpretationes. Declarationes pure tales sunt, cum ab illis explicatur aliquis sensus, qui usque ab initio iam erat clare imbibitus in lege: ex. gr. si dubium sit, an sub verbo filii intelligatur solus legitimus aut eitam spurius, et legislator declarat intelligi etiam spurium, tunc verum fit quod sensus in lege erat clare imbibitus. Interpretatio autem, sive declaratio non pure talis est illa, cuius sensus non est clare imbibitus in lege, sed circa ipsum variae sunt opiniones, et tantum deducitur ex argumentis, v. gr. quod sub nomine patris intelligatur eitam avus, aut quod sub nomine moartis intelligatur etiam mors civilis, prout est carcer perpetuus, aut simile, recurrendo ad quamdam impropriam significationem.

 His positis, dicimus cum Suarez, Castropal. Vasques, Sals, Salm. Holzaman, La-Croix, Supplet Sporger etc. quod declaratio sensus clare imbibiti in lege non requirit promulagationem, sed etiam obliget eos omnes qui illum noverint, cum talis declaratio non sit nova lex. Interpretatio vero alicuius sensus non clare, sed tantum obscure, sive improprie imbibiti in lege, quae est declaratio non pure talis (ut diximus) haec, quia habetur tanquam nova lex, ut obliget, necessario promulgationem requirit, sicut omnes aliae leges juxta dicta. n. 95 et 96. Hinc infertur cum Suar. de Leg. 1. 6. c. 1. n. 3 et Castrop. tr. 3. eod. tit. d. 5. p. 3. §. 1. n. 5 (qui citat pro se Bon. Salas, et Lorca) quod declaratio, quae fit a legislatore alicuius sensus clare in lege imbibiti (juxta exemplum adductum filii legitimi, et spurii) non requirit promulgatioem, ut obliget. Contra vero declaratio sensus obscure imbibiti (juxta exemplus avi sub nomine patris, vel mortis civilils sub nomine mortis) indiget quidem promulgatione; tunc enim ipsa novam constituit obligationem, quae per se non erat prius clare in lege imbibita. Et idem dicunt Suar. loc. cit. et Castrop. n. 2 de illis declarationibus, quae fiunt non ab eodem legislatore, sed ab eius successore, aut superiore; quia legislatoris mens nequit his esse ita cognita, ut erat ipsi legislatori; unde tunc, ut declaretur sensus (quamvis imbibitus in lege) alicuius obligationis, semper opus est recurrere ad argumenta, et interpretationes, quae novam legam constituunt, reddendo certum quod erat dubium; et ideo promulgatio requiritur, alias declaratio nunquam authentica, sed tantum doctrinalis repubabitur.

My English translation:On the Interpretation of Law
200. One interpretation is authentic, another customary, another academic.  An authentic (interpretation) can be made either by the legislator himself, and/or by his successor, or by a superior. A customary (interpretation) is that, which has been received thus by custom.  Moreover, an academic (interpretation) is a certain declaration of the mind of the legislator, which can be made by any professor.
Here, there is doubted whether declarations, which are made by the Pontiff, and/or by a prince for any law, are in need of promulgation, to oblige.  In this, it is necessary to distinguish those which are purely such from those which are not purely such, but rather mere interpretations.  Declarations are purely such, when by them there is explicated some sense, which was clearly incorporated in the law already from the beginning: e. g., if there be a doubt, whether under the term, “son” there be understood only a legitimate or even an illegitimate son, and the the legislator declares (the word “son” in the law”) is to be understood even as an illegitimate one, then indeed it becomes that (that) sense in the law was clearly incorporated in the law.  But an interpretation, or declaration which is not purely such, is that, the sense of which is not clearly incorporated in the law, but about which there are various opinions, and as much as is deduced through arguments, e. g., that under the term, “father”, there be understood also a grandfather, or that under the term, “death”, there be also understood a civil death, insofar as is perpetual incarceration, or the like, by recurring to a certain improper signification.
With these things posited, We say with Suarez, Castropal., Vasquez, Sals. Salimancans, Holzman, La-Croix, Supplet Sporget etc.., that the declaration of a sense clearly incorporated in the law does not require promulgation, but that it also obliges all those who know of it, though such a declaration is not a new law.  But an interpretation of some sense not clearly, but obscurely, or improperly incorporated in the law, which is not a declaration purely such (as we have said above), this (kind), because it is held to be a new law, to oblige, requires necessarily a promulgation, just as all other laws spoke of in nn. 95 and 96.  Hence, there is inferred with Suarez de Leg. 1. 6. c. 1. n. 3 and Castrop. tr. 3. eod. tit. d. 5. p. 3. §. 1. n. 5 (qui citat pro se Bon. Salas, et Lorca), that a declaration, which is made by the legislator of any sense clearly incorporated in the law (according to the example given above of the legitimate and illegitimate son) does not require a promulgation, to oblige. However, contrariwise, the declaration of a sense obscurely incorporated (according to the example given of a grandfather under the term of “father”, and/or of a civil death under the term of “death”) do indeed need a promulgation; for then it itself constitutes a new obligation, which per se was not beforehand clearly incorporated in the law. And the same is said by Suarez. loc. cit, and Castrop. n. 2, of those declarations, which are not made by the ssame legislator, but by his successor, or superior; because the mind of the legislator is never so known to other as it was to the legislator himself: on which account, then, to declare the sense (though incorporated in the law) of any obligation, it is always necessary to have recourse to arguments, and interpretations, which constitute a new law, by rendering certain what was doubtful; and for that reason a promulgation is required, otherwise the declaration is never an authentic one, but only is reputed to be a doctrinal one.Thus, Saint Alphonsus.

What the teaching of Saint Alphonsus on Legal interpretation means in regard to the Renunciation

From this text, we can glean three truths.

1. When the meaning is clearly incorporated into the law, that meaning is the authentic one, and its sense is binding upon all, as for example, when Benedict says he renounces the ministry, all are obliged to understand that as a renunciation of ministry.
2. When the word which is subject to a possible interpretation is a noun which includes all possible interpretations according to its essential signification, such as “son” includes natural and legal sons, not just legal sons, then the interpretation is a customary one and is obliging upon all, once the legislator declares that his mind was to include all such possibilities.  But before such a declaration it is not binding.
3. When the word which is subject to a possible interpretation is a noun, which DOES NOT include the possible wanted interpretation, such as “ministerium” in the text of Pope Benedict’s resignation is wanted to mean “munus” or “officium” which are entirely other words, then the interpretation is NOT AUTHENTIC and is not binding upon anyone, and only can become binding, when promulgated by the legislator or his successors.

And thus one can conclude, from the testimony of Bishop Arrieta and Saint Alphonsus, that the interpretation of the Cardinals and Bishops that Benedict’s renunciation of ministry is equivalent in law, or signification, or intention, to a resignation of the Papal Office or Petrine Munus, is not only an illegitimate interpretation, but is an interpretation which is not binding upon anyone!

Moreover, one can conclude, that even if hypothetically any successor of Pope Benedict XVI were to say that such a reading of the text (where ministerium = munus) is the one Benedict intended, then the act itself posited by Benedict was invalid as per canon 332 §2, since it was not duly manifest in itself, but required another promulgated interpretation to make it valid.

And this means that the very existence of the plot to solve the Pope Emeritus problem is not only evidence that the resignation was invalid from the start, but is DOOMED TO FAILURE since as an interpretation of the act, its very promulgation will publicly testify to and canonically establish the invalidity of the renunciation!

In other words, there is no way to fix the invalidity of the resignation by any subsequent act. And what the Cardinals and Bishops are doing is GRAVELY IMMORAL AND DISHONEST and, moreover, is a grave USURPATION OF RIGHT.

One can also honestly say, therefore, that the usurpation of the Papacy by Bergoglio is a moral consequence of the usurpation of the right of interpretation by the Cardinals, and that Bergoglio’s bizarre moral character and state of mind is the perfect fruit of and punishment for their sin.

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

 –  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. 

“If you wish to be perfect” (Mt 19:21) 

16. The answer he receives about the commandments does not satisfy the young man, who asks Jesus a further question. “I have kept all these; what do I still lack? ” (Mt 19:20). It is not easy to say with a clear conscience “I have kept all these”, if one has any understanding of the real meaning of the demands contained in God’s Law. And yet, even though he is able to make this reply, even though he has followed the moral ideal seriously and generously from childhood, the rich young man knows that he is still far from the goal: before the person of Jesus he realizes that he is still lacking something. It is his awareness of this insufficiency that Jesus addresses in his final answer. Conscious of the young man’s yearning for something greater, which would transcend a legalistic interpretation of the commandments, the Good Teacher invites him to enter upon the path of perfection: “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me” (Mt 19:21). 

Like the earlier part of Jesus’ answer, this part too must be read and interpreted in the context of the whole moral message of the Gospel, and in particular in the context of the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes (cf. Mt 5:3-12), the first of which is precisely the Beatitude of the poor, the “poor in spirit” as Saint Matthew makes clear (Mt 5:3), the humble. In this sense it can be said that the Beatitudes are also relevant to the answer given by Jesus to the young man’s question: “What good must I do to have eternal life? “. Indeed, each of the Beatitudes promises, from a particular viewpoint, that very “good” which opens man up to eternal life, and indeed is eternal life. 

The Beatitudes are not specifically concerned with certain particular rules of behaviour. Rather, they speak of basic attitudes and dispositions in life and therefore they do not coincide exactly with the commandments. On the other hand, there is no separation or opposition between the Beatitudes and the commandments: both refer to the good, to eternal life. The Sermon on the Mount begins with the proclamation of the Beatitudes, but also refers to the commandments (cf. Mt 5:20-48). At the same time, the Sermon on the Mount demonstrates the openness of the commandments and their orientation towards the horizon of the perfection proper to the Beatitudes. These latter are above all promises, from which there also indirectly flow normative indications for the moral life. In their originality and profundity they are a sort of self- portrait of Christ, and for this very reason are invitations to discipleship and to communion of life with Christ.²⁶

17. We do not know how clearly the young man in the Gospel understood the profound and challenging import of Jesus’ first reply: “If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments”. But it is certain that the young man’s commitment to respect all the moral demands of the commandments represents the absolutely essential ground in which the desire for perfection can take root and mature, the desire, that is, for the meaning of the commandments to be completely fulfilled in following Christ. Jesus’ conversation with the young man helps us to grasp the conditions for the moral growth of man, who has been called to perfection: the young man, having observed all the commandments, shows that he is incapable of taking the next step by himself alone. To do so requires mature human freedom (“If you wish to be perfect”) and God’s gift of grace (“Come, follow me”). 

Perfection demands that maturity in self-giving to which human freedom is called. Jesus points out to the young man that the commandments are the first and indispensable condition for having eternal life; on the other hand, for the young man to give up all he possesses and to follow the Lord is presented as an invitation: “If you wish…”. These words of Jesus reveal the particular dynamic of freedom’s growth towards maturity, and at the same time they bear witness to the fundamental relationship between freedom and divine law. Human freedom and God’s law are not in opposition; on the contrary, they appeal one to the other. The follower of Christ knows that his vocation is to freedom. “You were called to freedom, brethren” (Gal 5:13), proclaims the Apostle Paul with joy and pride. But he immediately adds: “only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another” (ibid.). The firmness with which the Apostle opposes those who believe that they are justified by the Law has nothing to do with man’s “liberation” from precepts. On the contrary, the latter are at the service of the practice of love: “For he who loves his neighbour has fulfilled the Law. The commandments, ‘You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall not covet,’ and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’ ” (Rom 13:8-9). Saint Augustine, after speaking of the observance of the commandments as being a kind of incipient, imperfect freedom, goes on to say: “Why, someone will ask, is it not yet perfect? Because ‘I see in my members another law at war with the law of my reason’… In part freedom, in part slavery: not yet complete freedom, not yet pure, not yet whole, because we are not yet in eternity. In part we retain our weakness and in part we have attained freedom. All our sins were destroyed in Baptism, but does it follow that no weakness remained after iniquity was destroyed? Had none remained, we would live without sin in this life. But who would dare to say this except someone who is proud, someone unworthy of the mercy of our deliverer?… Therefore, since some weakness has remained in us, I dare to say that to the extent to which we serve God we are free, while to the extent that we follow the law of sin, we are still slaves”.²⁷

18. Those who live “by the flesh” experience God’s law as a burden, and indeed as a denial or at least a restriction of their own freedom. On the other hand, those who are impelled by love and “walk by the Spirit” (Gal 5:16), and who desire to serve others, find in God’s Law the fundamental and necessary way in which to practise love as something freely chosen and freely lived out. Indeed, they feel an interior urge — a genuine “necessity” and no longer a form of coercion — not to stop at the minimum demands of the Law, but to live them in their “fullness”. This is a still uncertain and fragile journey as long as we are on earth, but it is one made possible by grace, which enables us to possess the full freedom of the children of God (cf. Rom 8:21) and thus to live our moral life in a way worthy of our sublime vocation as “sons in the Son”. 

This vocation to perfect love is not restricted to a small group of individuals. The invitation, “go, sell your possessions and give the money to the poor”, and the promise “you will have treasure in heaven”, are meant for everyone, because they bring out the full meaning of the commandment of love for neighbour, just as the invitation which follows, “Come, follow me”, is the new, specific form of the commandment of love of God. Both the commandments and Jesus’ invitation to the rich young man stand at the service of a single and indivisible charity, which spontaneously tends towards that perfection whose measure is God alone: “You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Mt 5:48). In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus makes even clearer the meaning of this perfection: “Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful” (Lk 6:36). 

LifeSite will be hosting a townhall conference with The Truth for Health Foundation, “Stop the Shot… The Rest of the Story.” This online meeting will feature Dr. Peter McCullough, Attorney Thomas Renz, Dr. Michael Yeadon, Sister Deidre Byrne, Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet, Dr. Jose Trasancos, and other prominent physicians, scientists, attorneys, and religious leaders who will be discussing vital information related to the COVID jab, clinical trials, and more. Scheduled for Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 12pm Eastern. To watch the presentation, simply head to LifeSiteNews.com. To have the opportunity to ask the presenters a question following the presentation, please RSVP to the email below. Here’s a brief look at what will be shared at this online meeting:Breaking information will be shard by the lead attorney in U.S. suit against the Biden regime’s HHS regarding VAERS, adverse events, under-reporting deaths, and injuries. This presentation will also include an update on the CDC Whistleblower affidavit, which indicates more than 45,000 actual deaths have taken place following the COVID shot, verses the VAERS reports of only 11,000.Previously undisclosed data from both Pharma-clinical trials and subsequent additional studies on the COVID jab related to specific, serious, immediate, and long-term impacts on fertility in both men and women.Updates on international medical studies regarding actual vaccine immunity verses what has been reported to the public by the media.Breaking information regarding international lawsuits and theological implications related to the latest COVID news around the world.CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE CONFERENCE FOR FREE ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4TH! **In order to have the opportunity to ask questions after the conference, please email Info@TruthforHealth.org to receive the conference call link. We ask that only serious individuals RSVP as space is limited on the post presentation Q&A conference call.

LifeSiteNews 4 Family Life Lane Front Royal, VA 22630 +1 (888) 678-6008 Copyright © 2021 LifeSiteNew

Milliman Research Report1
2020 U.S. organ and tissue transplants Billed charges and Physician Billed charges extracted with comments
by
Paul A. Byrne, M.D.
July 13, 2021

1 Milliman Research Project. 2020 U.S. organ and tissue transplants: Cost estimates, discussion and emerging trends. January 2021. Prepared by T. Scott Bentley, FSA, MAAA, Nick J. Ortner, FSA, MAAA

1

Milliman, Inc., has published the 2020 edition of its triennial report on the number of U.S. organ and tissue transplants and estimated costs. 86% (38,794) of organ transplants were from a “deceased donor as one from whom at least one vascularized solid organ—heart, intestine, kidney, liver, lung, or pancreas.”2 Thus, although called “deceased,” the patient had a beating heart, circulation, and respiration (oxygen in, carbon dioxide out of organs throughout the body including “at least one vascularized organ”) that continued to one or more organs up to, or very close to, the time of taking the organ.

Annual costs per member per month (PMPM), including utilization and billed charges, related to the 30 days prior through 180 days after transplant admission for organ and tissue transplants. This includes single-organ transplants such as heart, intestine, kidney, liver, lung, and pancreas, and multiple-organ transplants; tissue transplants include bone marrow and cornea.

Per member costs increased by of 11% for those under age 65, and 10.5% for those age 65 and over when compared to the 2017 report. The analysis also examined trends in hospital lengths of stay, average waiting times for organs, and changes in survival rates between our 2017 and 2020 reports, with results varying by transplant.

4% (6324) were from a living donor. Living donors include bone marrow, kidney, and liver. A donor may live with one kidney with little danger because the remaining kidney enlarges to do the work that both kidneys previously shared. The liver can regenerate a donated segment. Intestine, lung, pancreas, and kidney-pancreas transplants can also use living donors.

“Living lung donors have a segment of one lung removed for transplants. Lung lobes do not regenerate the donated segment, but the average decrease in the living donor’s lung capacity generally yields minimal physical limitations for the donor.

“Living donor data includes living donors from whom organs were transplanted in the US. The number of living donor transplants may differ from the number of living donors because living donors might donate segments more than one organ or there may be multiple donors for one transplant.”

Living kidney donation is 5900 annually. Living liver donation has increased incrementally from 345 in 2016 to 424 in 2019.

2 United Network for Organ Sharing UNOS) defines a recovered, deceased donor as one from whom at least one vascularized solid organ—heart, intestine, kidney, liver, lung, or pancreas—was recovered for transplantation.

2

“Average one year survival rate has decreased by 13.6%; average 5-year survival rate has decreased 36%.

CHANGE IN SURVIVAL RATES

Since our 2017 report, patient survival rates appear to have generally decreased.
The decreases shown may be due to volatility arising from small volumes, changes in data or methodology, or other unknown reasons. (Highlights PAB)

NOTE: SURVIVAL RATES REFLECT THE U.S. ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND * SINGLE AND DOUBLE TRANSPLANTATION NETWORK AND THE SCIENTIFIC REGISTRY OF TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS DATA AS OF OCT 31, 2019 AND DEC 31, 2016, RESPECTIVE”

3

Organ Transplants in US (10 months) 2020: 38,794 Single organ transplants

Heart 3499 Intestine 38 Kidney 21963 Liver 8219 Lung-Single 821 Lung-double 2011 Pancreas 126

Total 36,677 Multiple Organ transplants:

Heart-lung 35 Intestine with other organs 58 Kidney-heart 238 Kidney-pancreas 900 Liver-kidney 807 Other multi-organ 79

Total 2117

Tissue Transplants in US (10 months) 2020: 77,760 Bone Marrow autologous14,745

Single Organ Transplants Male 57%

Race:

Female 43%

White 65% Black 16% Hispanic, Asian Other

Bone marrow allogenic Cornea

Total
Recipient Demographics 2019 (latest year with data)

9,950

Multiple Organ Transplants 62%

25%

55% 25% 19% 29%

53,065 77,760

4

BILLED CHARGES TOTAL $48,304,602,600 (48 billion) Of total charges, BILLED PHYSICIAN CHARGES $6,380,488,200 (6 billion)

Billed charges from period 30 days pre-transplant to 180 days post-transplant

CORNEA

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 53,065 BILLED CHARGES $32,500
TOTAL $1,724,612,500

Physician during transplant admission $9200 Physician TOTAL $488,198,000

HEART

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 3,499 BILLED CHARGES $1,664,800 TOTAL $5,825,135,200

Physician during transplant admission $111,100 Physician TOTAL 388,738,900

BONE MARROW

AUTOLOGOUS (donor is recipient) NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 9,950 BILLED CHARGES $1,071,700 TOTAL $10,663,415,000

$11,800 Physician TOTAL $117,410,000

Physician during transplant admission

ALLOGENEIC (donor may be related or not related)

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 14,745

5

BILLED CHARGES $471,600 TOTAL $6,953,742,000

Physician during transplant admission $27,700 Physician TOTAL $408,436,500

LUNGS

SINGLE
NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 821

BILLED CHARGES $929,600 TOTAL $763,201,600

55,100 Physician TOTAL 45,237,100

Physician during transplant admission

DOUBLE
NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 2,011 BILLED CHARGES $1,295,900 TOTAL $2,606,054,900

Physician during transplant admission

$77,200
TOTAL $148,612,900

INTESTINE

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 38 BILLED CHARGES $1,240,700 TOTAL $47,146,600

Physician during transplant admission

Physician TOTAL

$73,900 $2,808,200

6

KIDNEY

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 21,963 BILLED CHARGES $442,500 TOTAL $9,718,627,500

Physician during transplant admission 26,200 Physician TOTAL 575,430,600

LIVER

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 8,219 BILLED CHARGES $878,400 TOTAL $7,219,569,600

Physician during transplant admission

Physician TOTAL

PANCREAS

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 126 BILLED CHARGES $408,800 TOTAL $51,508,800

Physician during transplant admission

Physician TOTAL

Heart-Lung

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 35
BILLED CHARGES 2,637,200 TOTAL $92,302,000

Physician during transplant admission Physician TOTAL $5,071,500

490,600 4,032,241,400

23,900 3,011,400

$144,900

7

Intestine with other organs

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 58 BILLED CHARGES 1,662,900
TOTAL $96,448,200

Physician during transplant admission $99,000 Physician TOTAL $5,742,000

Kidney-Heart

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 238 BILLED CHARGES $2,664,600 TOTAL $634,174,800

Physician during transplant admission $173,300

Physician TOTAL

Kidney-Pancreas

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 900

BILLED CHARGES 713,800

TOTAL $642,420,000

Physician during transplant admission
Physician TOTAL $35,550,000

Liver-Kidney

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 807 BILLED CHARGES 1,355,100

TOTAL $1,093,565,700

Physician during transplant admission $88,400 Physician TOTAL $71,338,800

Other Multi-Organ

NUMBER OF TRANSPLANTS 79 BILLED CHARGES 2,185,800

$41,245,400

$39,500

8

TOTAL $172,678,200

Physician during transplant admission $144,500 Physician TOTAL $11,415,500

BILLED CHARGES TOTAL billion)

$48,304,602,600 (48

Of total charges, BILLED PHYSICIAN CHARGES TOTAL $6,380,488,200 (6 billion)

THE 2020 PROJECTIONS ABOVE REPRESENT ESTIMATED U.S. AVERAGE BILLED CHARGES AND UTILIZATION RELATED TO THE 30 DAYS PRIOR THROUGH 180 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANT ADMISSION.

9

10

11

12

13

[Work product:

This Page (Cornea to allogenic) Total Physician Total

This Page (lungs to intestine) Total This Page Physician Total

This page (kidney to pancreas) Total This page Physician Total

This Page (kidney-heart to other) Total This page Physician Total

This Page Total
This page Physician Total

25,166,904,700 1,402,783,400

3,416,403,100 196,658,200

16,989,705,900 4,610,683,400

1,908,663,900 118,304,300

822,925,000 52,058,900 ]

the DAILY KNIGHT

Archbishop Vigano: COVID Vaccine is a Human Sacrifice to Satan

By David Martin | The Daily Knight

Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, the former Papal Nuncio to the United States has decried the COVID vaccine made with aborted baby tissue, saying it is a tool to advance the globalist ideology which is “anti-human,” anti-religious,” and anti-christic.”

In the forward to a new book on the problems with the COVID vaccine, the Archbishop points out that abortion is a sacrifice to the devil and he says that by being inoculated with a vaccine made with aborted baby parts people are participating in this sacrifice to Satan.

Satanic Antichurch

Vigano cites how Antichrist claims the unborn “through the pharmaceutical companies that use fetal tissue from abortions to manufacture a so-called vaccine that is presented in the delirium of Covid-19 as a sacrament of salvation by which one is incorporated into the ‘mystical body’ of Satan, the globalist anti-church.”

He says that “the ‘liturgical’ connotation of the pandemic intentionally echoes signs and symbols proper to the True Religion in such a way as to deceive even the simple and push them to conform to a collective cult.” He points out the “intolerant attitude of the Covid priests, the health magisterium of the ‘experts,’ the inquisition against the denier ‘heretics,’ and the fideistic adherence to the most grotesque superstitions passed off as science by virologist sorcerers and television vestals.”

Vigano also points out how the moral dissent of today’s Catholic hierarchy has laid the groundwork for this new satanic church of man.

“If the Pope and the Bishops had a minimum of fear of God, they would not try to justify with unworthy sophistry a vaccine that in order to be produced requires stem cells obtained from voluntarily aborted fetuses. The pretium sanguinis [price of blood] would be enough to make them not even take it into consideration, but perhaps among the beneficiaries of that pretiun there are also Prelates who care more about the hypocritical praise of the enemies of Christ than the heroic witness of the Faith.”

Above all, Archbishop Vigano laments the “barbarism” of the COVID vaccine in how babies are being murdered and used to murder the adults, especially the sick and the elderly.

“The most innocent and defenseless creature, the baby in the womb in the third month of gestation, is sacrificed and dismembered in order to extract tissue from his still palpitating body with which to produce a non-cure, a non-vaccine, which not only does not heal from the virus, but in all likelihood causes a greater percentage of death than Covid itself, especially in the elderly or those who are sick.”

COVID Vaccine is Poison

The vaccine indeed is poison. The world’s most competent medical experts, including Byram Bridle, Ph.D., Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, and internationally acclaimed physician Joseph Mercola, M.D. have already made it clear that the COVID vaccine is a deadly bio-weapon that has killed countless thousands of people throughout the world. Dr. Zelenko suspects that up to 100,000 people have now died from the vaccine. https://stateofthenation.co/?p=72093

Given this and the fact that the COVID vaccine is consecrated to satan, one would think that humanity would instantly reject it as an abomination of apocalyptic proportions, but instead we see the world’s peoples bowing to the “venerable” jab as if it were a favor from Christ, not acknowledging it to be a favor from the Antichrist – their “passport” to ride. (Apoc. 13:17) Vigano says:

“The so-called ‘vaccine’ has turned out only to be the source of enormous, scandalous profits for Big Pharma and, at the same time, serves as a pretext to impose health passports and other systems for controlling the masses and limiting natural liberties.”

The vaccine indeed is a political tool for shackling the world under a communistic one-world government, the worst of it being that Francis and his bishops are assisting world planners in this insidious attempt to strip man of his freedoms in the name of public health and safety. Francis himself has said that when the U.N. globalists speak “our duty is to obey.” https://youtu.be/FBOeHudjqGM

We pray that the pope and bishops will turn their backs on this global synagogue and remember their allegiance to Christ who forbids that political world powers should exert the least influence on His Church. Let them remember that any participation in the murder of the unborn will eternally banish them from the Kingdom of God.

A sizable except of Archbishop Vigano’s statement is contained at the following link. Scroll to the bottom. https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/archbishop-vigano-vaccines-made-with-fetal-tissue-are-a-human-sacrifice-of-innocent-victims-offered-to-satan/

Search

• » From the First Three Minutes to Us
• Robert Royal

From the First Three Minutes to UsRobert RoyalMONDAY, AUGUST 2, 2021One of the past century’s greatest scientists, Steven Weinberg, died last week amid worldwide acclaim. He wasn’t famous like Einstein or Stephen Hawking, but he probably did more to explain and unify notions about the fundamental constituents of matter and the origins of our universe than any other recent figure. And unlike many scientists, he could write – for technical audiences as well as for general readers. He rightly received a Nobel Prize in 1979. Weinberg stayed active in research and teaching until shortly before he died, a fitting finish for an amazingly productive life – but also a tragic life of cosmic proportions.His death sent me back to his most famous book: The First Three Minutes. I began university as a physics student. My turn into whatever I am now was, for my father, puzzling. Physics he understood. Liberal studies, he thought, were for rich people who didn’t need to earn a living. At some youthful moments, I almost thought he was right. But in my dotage, I suspect a hidden hand guided me – as it guided Socrates from his early interest in materialist science to philosophy, though with infinitely more modest results. My look back into The First Three Minutes confirms that it was right, for me, to turn elsewhere.That book, as the title indicates, is a popular account of the beginnings of the universe. (Let us leave aside for the moment how to understand those “minutes” since, as St. Augustine was aware long before Einstein, time itself comes into being with space and, therefore, the nature of time is not easy to specify.) The book is a lively portrayal of the stages scientists believe the universe passed through. From the Big Bang (first postulated in 1927 by the Belgian priest Georges Lemaître) to 10^-43 sec. – so-called Planck Time. If you’ve forgotten the math, this means:1 sec. /10 followed by 43 zeroesAn inconceivably short time.For that brief space, whatever had come into existence was undifferentiated, or at least we can’t see back further. At 10^-37sec. the universe expands faster than the speed of light (impossible now) and material forms with which we are more familiar started to appear. According to Weinberg – the remark was perhaps meant to be humorous – “After that [the first three minutes], nothing of any interest would happen in the history of the universe.”Or perhaps it wasn’t a joke. He was also famous for saying, “The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.” Like many scientists – and an increasing number of ordinary people who know little real science – the approach that modern physics makes to the world, ruling out value questions and almost all relations that cannot be expressed mathematically, which inevitably results in a vision of the universe not as our cosmic home, but as an immense, indifferent, dead, absurd, hostile place – is now the assumed background of our whole society. It’s no wonder so many of our young people say it’s “science” that has turned them into “Nones.”Einstein and LemaîtreAnd that’s the tragedy for Weinberg and us, despite the indisputable genius. I want to ask figures like Weinberg questions such as: but doesn’t the fact that you can know all this mean we are something other than just another physical structure of cells inside our skulls? The day you met the wife you were married to for 68 years, your daughter, her daughter, was all that – and the sun as it rose outside your door every morning – “nothing of any interest”? Is human life just all biology with a thin crust of sociology and psychology on top, all three reducible to chemistry, chemistry to particle physics, the old particle physics itself now reduced to quantum indeterminacy with “spooky,” seemingly illogical effects?To be clear, I still find all these disciplines quite fascinating, not only in themselves but in the many valuable things they have produced for the relief of our human condition. I’ve even cracked my head (privately) on quantum theories several times in recent years. My main puzzle is not with the science, not even with the modern architecture of the sciences as I just oversimplified them. My quarrel is with the sad, now-old song lacking life, beauty, love, meaning – ultimately God.Weinberg had the usual disdain for religion, which he pronounced false and an obstacle to seeing the nature of the world. That such an intelligent man would hold on to this ancient myth is disappointing. Weinberg must have known that Fr. Lemaître was hardly the only believer who was also a great scientist – and that the relation between faith and reason is not merely a dispute over Galileo or Darwin. What if the scientific method, proper and productive as it is in its own sphere, is the very thing that for many people prevents them from seeing what might satisfy their deepest desires for meaning, significance, a truth that matters. And where do these urges come from? They make no sense on Darwinian or other materialist theories.How is it that every known culture has not been content simply to ascribe everything to physical forces that – they as we – of course know exist? What is it that makes us, even makes Steven Weinberg, look out there? He’s like a teenage mechanic trying to understand more and more of how the car’s engine runs while everyone else is going out Saturday night.And what keeps such a person at this mournful task?Existence – especially life – is too mysterious, strange, wonderful, to limit it to what our brains can determine about the physical world. (For a wiser perspective, try physicist Stephen Barr’s Modern Physics and Ancient Faith.) We’ve confused for far too long conceptual genius with human wisdom. Even with goodness. It’s right that we continue to carry out that very human thing, the scientific enterprise. But there’s another kind of science, even though we mostly ignore it. It’s what makes everything after those first three minutes not only “of interest,” but infinitely intriguing.© 2021 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.orgThe Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.About the AuthorLatest ArticlesRobert RoyalDr. Robert Royal is editor-in-chief of The Catholic Thing, president of the Faith & Reason Institute in Washington, D.C., and currently serves as the St. John Henry Newman Visiting Chair in Catholic Studies at Thomas More College. His most recent books are Columbus and the Crisis of the West and A Deeper Vision: The Catholic Intellectual Tradition in the Twentieth Century.

The people who have died have died for multiple reasons, none of which has anything to do with SARS-CoV-2…

COVID-19 is the murder of old people In the 1973 film, Soylent Green, a NY police detective discovers that the vastly overcrowded, poverty–stricken population of the city—who are being sustained on processed government food, called Soylent—are now unknowingly eating humans who have died. That’s what Soylent Green is made of. That’s the terrible secret. What’s the secret now? It’s all there in the open-source literature… by Jon Rappoport (To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.) Let’s start here: The SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist. The supposed diagnostic tests are meaningless. The case numbers are meaningless. The people who have died have died for multiple reasons, none of which has anything to do with SARS-CoV-2. I have spent the past year writing over 300 articles, providing compelling evidence for the above assertions. There are “people who have died who are LABELED COVID deaths.” AKA “official reality.” AKA “official lies.” Who are these people? By and large, who are they? Here are two statements. The people DID die, but not because of SARS-CoV-2: The Kaiser Family Foundation, July 24, 2020: “Adults 65 and older account for 16% of the US population but 80% of COVID-19 deaths in the US…” AARP, April 1, 2021: “95 percent of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. have occurred among people who were 50 or older.” A member of Biden’s coronavirus task force, Dr. Zeke Emanuel, once stated there is no reason people should want to live beyond the age of 75. Just go gently into that good night. Well, what is called COVID is old people. My first clue about the elderly came from a report published by Italy’s National Institute of Health during the early days of the “pandemic.” It stated that the average age of people dying from COVID in the country was 79.5. That clue was the size of an aircraft carrier parked outside your house. Soon after the Italian report, the Institute of Health went dark. No more research was released. No updates. They’d spoken out of school, and someone slapped them in the head. Open-source press reports revealed the “excess mortality” of 2020 was largely the result of elderly people dying in nursing homes. This has nothing to do with a virus. It has to do with patients who are ALREADY on a long downward health slide. They ALREADY have multiple health conditions. For years, even decades, they’ve been pounded with toxic medical drugs, weakening their bodies and shredding their immune systems— And THEN they’re hit with the TERROR of an arbitrary and fake COVID-19 diagnosis— And THEN they’re isolated and shut off from family and friends—in facilities where gross neglect and indifference are all too often the “standard of care.” Death is the direct result. Forced premature death. These patients just fold up and die. The managers of pandemic information tell the big lie. They spin tales about “the virus” having a greater impact on the elderly. No, the STORY about a virus has the impact. The terror has the deadly impact. The isolation has the deadly impact. The terror and the isolation deliver the final blow. To an astounding extent, COVID-19 is a NURSING HOME DISASTER. Mass murder by cruelty. Memo to financial investigators: Calculate how much money government and private insurers are saving, because they don’t have to keep paying for the long-term care of all the old people who are dying premature deaths in nursing homes. The money number will be staggering. Tony Fauci knows the con. He knows COVID-19 is old people. People are dying from the fear he promotes. Fauci has no shred of shame. He’s a mouthpiece turned out by Bill Gates and David Rockefeller. Evil permeates the COVID operation. The elderly in nursing homes are the primary target. Getting them to die earlier is the tactic, in order to pump up the fake COVID mortality numbers. Without those phony numbers, the whole “pandemic” would be exposed in an hour. I’ve said there were two key events in the foisting of the whole vicious COVID fiction—the Chinese regime locking down 50 million citizens overnight for no good medical reason, giving the green light to the World Health Organization and the CDC to “follow the new model”; and the Bill Gates-financed computer projection of deaths, put together by Neil Ferguson, who lied through his teeth when he claimed half a million people could die in the UK and two million in the US by the summer of 2020—thus supplying the final “rationale” for the lockdowns. The third key event was and is the sustained attack on the elderly. Kill these people with terror and isolation, and make the death numbers escalate. As of May 22, 2020, Forbes reported that, “…in the 43 states that currently report such figures, an astounding 42% of all COVID-19 deaths have taken place in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.” Washington Post, May 18, 2020: “The World Health Organization said half of Europe’s covid-19 deaths occurred in such facilities.” Headline of same Post article: “Canada’s nursing home crisis: 81 percent of coronavirus deaths [in the country] are in long-term care facilities.” The Guardian, May 16, 2020: “About 90% of the 3,700 people who have died from coronavirus in Sweden were over 70, and half were living in care homes, according to a study from Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare at the end of April.” “The country [Spain] was shocked at the end of March when the defence minister revealed that soldiers drafted in to disinfect residential homes had found some elderly people abandoned and dead in their beds.” “…the regional governments of Madrid and Catalonia have been publishing their own figures on people who have died in care homes…” “In Madrid, the total for Covid, or suspected Covid, deaths since 8 March stood at 5,886 on Thursday. In Catalonia, it was 3,375. Between them, care home deaths in the two regions account for more than a third of all the coronavirus deaths in the country.” And there was a great deal of early warning on the subject, if anyone from public health agencies wanted to pay attention—The Guardian, 13 April, 2020: “About half of all Covid-19 deaths appear to be happening in care homes in some European countries…Snapshot data from varying official sources shows that in Italy, Spain, France, Ireland and Belgium between 42% and 57% of deaths from the virus have been happening in homes, according to the report by academics based at the London School of Economics (LSE).” These nursing home figures only give a partial picture. Consider the HUGE NUMBER of elderly, already-ill people who are basically in the same situation AT HOME—terrified by COVID propaganda, locked down, isolated; and then die—and also those who manage to make it to a hospital, where they are put on breathing ventilators, heavily sedated, and killed. The Hill, undated (late April 2020), reported on “data…gathered at Northwell Health, New York state’s largest hospital system. The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) examines 5,700 patients hospitalized with coronavirus infections in the New York City region, with final outcomes recorded for 2,634 patients. The average patient age was 63 years old… For the next oldest age group, ages 66 years and older, patients receiving mechanical ventilation recorded a 97.2 percent mortality rate.” And yet the ventilator death-treatment continues. As does treatment with remdesivir, a highly toxic drug. The New York Times (June 27, 2020) reported that 43 percent of all US COVID deaths were occurring in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities for the elderly. In at least 24 states, more than 50 percent of all COVID deaths were occurring in these facilities. The Times failed to mention deaths of the elderly at hospitals or, at home, cut off from family and friends. The situation is far worse than the Times made it out to be. COVID is old people. Pushed into death. It’s mass murder. Behind politicians’ and public health officials’ oh so caring directives and demands and declarations and pronouncements, it’s mass murder. Imagine YOU were 80 years old. For years you’ve been suffering from multiple serious health conditions. For years, doctors have been giving you many toxic drugs, carving up your immune system, weakening your body, affecting your judgement. Along comes a false story about a deadly virus. Every time you turn on the television set, there it is, that fearful story. You’re terrified. Maybe the virus will visit you. And then one day, your doctor gives you a test, or simply eyeballs your clinical symptoms, and says yes, you have it. The virus. You’re infected. Your terror escalates. Your worst nightmare has come true. And suddenly, you’re isolated in your home, alone, or you’re locked up in your room in a nursing home, cut off from family and friends. Day after day, week after week. What would you do? Chances are, you would see no point in living. You would give up and die. The operation called COVID is old people. Killing old people. ~~~ (The link to this article posted on my blog is here.) (Follow me on Gab at @jonrappoport)  Use this link to order Jon’s Matrix Collections.  Jon Rappoport The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.  You can find this article and more at NoMoreFakeNews.

Blacks Need To Fear Their So-Called Allies August 2, 2021 Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a new Gallup poll on black Americans: A recent Gallup poll disclosed that 81% of blacks want either more time spent by police in their neighborhood, or about the same amount of time; only 19% want less. When asked how confident they were that they would be treated with courtesy and respect by police officers, 61% were confident they would be. To be sure, most want police reforms, but there is no interest in doing away with the cops. Interestingly, it appears that the police are less likely to hassle blacks than those who work in supermarkets or department shops. When asked if they felt that they were treated unfairly in the last 30 days in various venues—because they were black—35% said they were treated unfairly while shopping, but only 20% said they felt that way in dealing with the police. It would be a mistake, however, to think that all is well. When men and women of both races were asked, “Do you feel safe walking alone in the city or area where you live,” the results were predictable. Among white men, 91% felt safe; the figure for white women was 77%. But in the black community, the number dropped to 71% for men; worse, only 51% of the women felt safe. Unfortunately for blacks, the left-wing of the Democratic Party is working to make matters much more dangerous for them. To be specific, they want to do away with the police and the prisons. Most Americans are aware of the movement to defund the police, but most are unaware that there is also a big push underway to abolish prisons. On July 24, 2021, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) campaigned in Cleveland for congressional candidate Nina Turner, a far left-wing activist who said last year that voting for Joe Biden was like “eating a bowl of s***.” At the rally, AOC called for prisons to be abolished. “I want to abolish our carceral system that’s designed to trap Black and Brown men.” Two years earlier she said prison inmates were “slaves” who were forced to live in “cages.” Rep. Ilhan Omar, another member of the “Squad,” said last year that there is a “cancer” in police departments and that nothing short of radical steps must be taken to destroy it. She bellowed, “we don’t want your damn reforms.” Two other “Squad” members, Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, introduced legislation a year ago that would abolish prisons. The bill to release felons from prison was enthusiastically endorsed by Black Lives Matter, proving, ironically, that black lives obviously do not matter to them. Even more bizarre, the goal of letting murderers and rapists run free—we know which neighborhoods they would go back to—was dubbed “a love letter to black people.” The Klan could not improve on that. The American people, and blacks in particular, should know that the federal government gives tens of millions of dollars each year to an organization that wants to defund the police, the Vera Institute of Justice. The public should also know that the “Squad,” which wants to do away with cops and prisons, makes the taxpayers pay big bucks for their own security services. Black Americans are being screwed by those who proclaim to champion their cause. It is not white supremacists whom blacks need to fear, it’s the left-wing lunatics in the Democratic Party.