“Who is Really Behind the ‘White Supremacy’ Narrative?”
Lawyer and author Scott Lively explains “Who is Really Behind the ‘White Supremacy’ Narrative”:
I believe is the hidden hand behind the “White Supremacy” narrative that has become the centerpiece of the leftist strategy, driving everything from the BLM riots, to the Critical Race Theory blitzkrieg in the schools, to the orchestrated tidal wave of “Wokeness” in the business world, to the ideological defilement of professional sports, to the raft of overtly racist Biden executive orders thankfully being struck down by the courts. There is only one group in America that has owned the Anti-White Supremacy brand since its far-left founder Morris Dees leveraged the mailing list of the George McGovern Presidential Campaign of 1972 into one of the most lucrative fundraising machines in American history: the Southern Poverty Law Center or SPLC. The reprobate and highly controversial Dees was fired from his own organization in 2019, followed shortly by SPLC President Richard Cohen (under accusations of sexual harassment), who was replaced by high-level Amnesty International executive, Margaret Huang – perhaps best known in conservative circles for her vigorous defense (as SPLC President) of the de-platforming of President Trump from social media for “racism.” In the interest of full disclosure I have a personal beef with the SPLC, being one of the very first people added to its “hate groups” list when then-president Richard Cohen launched a new fund-raising arm pursuing wealthy LGBT donors when I was high on the list of people hated by LGBTs for co-authoring The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party. https://www.scottlively.net/scott-lively-books/the-pink-swastika/ (Cohen was reportedly a homosexual himself, though I could never document that due to the Internet-wide shield-wall he was protected behind while eagerly serving up every SPLC target to the most malign public character assassination possible.) But going after “White Supremacists” has always been the SPLC’s primary cash cow, even as the never-very-large supply of legitimate targets to fundraise against dwindled down to double digits with decreasing zeal for the cause. SPLC took down the most famous of the bunch decades ago, the Neo-Nazi Tom Metzger, whose Neo-Nazi Skinhead follower Ken “Death” Mieske (a “gay” male prostitute) and two others beat Ethiopian graduate student Mulugeta Seraw to death on the streets of Portland, Oregon in 1988, just a few blocks from where I was then living. I went after the SPLC in 2014 for its hypocrisy in covering up Mieske’s homosexuality and his deep history in Portland’s powerful “gay” subculture (including a close relationship with the homosexual film-maker Gus Van Sant) when they were attacking me as a dangerous crackpot for linking homosexuality and Nazism in The Pink Swastika. I think it is likely that homosexuality was the basis for the Metzger/Mieske relationship, but even if not, Mieske was without question a “gay” Nazi. It deserved mention here that the most infamous Nazi incident in American history, the Nazi March of June 24, 1978, (intended for a Jewish neighborhood of Holocaust survivors in Skokie, Illinois, but which took place in Chicago, instead) was led by homosexual Nazi Frank Collin, who later went to prison for sex with teenage boys (facts we documented in The Pink Swastika). ABC News conveniently omitted that fact when featuring Skokie in a major propaganda piece to falsely paint Charlottesville as a Trump-era version of that sordid event. And I don’t think the SPLC ever told the truth about Frank Collin either. The point here is that the SPLC has been the go-to leftist “authority” on white supremacy since the 1970s, and it is impossible to imagine that their team of lying, manipulative social engineers are not dead-center in the Obama/Clinton/Biden conspiracy against the MAGA movement and in shaping and driving the narrative that is redefining “white supremacy” to include just about anything politically conservative White people do. Their hate and deceit should be investigated and exposed with all the vigor that the conservative media and the MAGA movement can bring to bear. [Scott Lively’s Mission Dispatch, June 19, 2021,Observations and Action on Current Events, History and Theology. Subscribe HERE. Contact/Comment HERE.]Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He want 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)
– 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.
Here I sit again with lots of loosely organized thoughts and observations floating around in the old noggin, threatening to become gremlins when I doff the old nightcap. That can be a “life-affirming” experience for those of us with active minds, but sometimes you’ve just got to pull the trigger and commit them to print. Herewith the latest collection. (I hope at least some of you see them as blinding flashes of the obvious.) On Root CausesThose who follow the political funnies know that VP Chuckles Harris, palsy-walsy to P Bumbles Biden, has been assigned responsibility to deal with the border situation, as Harris-Biden fans call it, or the border crisis, as everyone else calls it. It’s hard not to believe that this was done to make Chuckles the designated loser in the administration and to drive her to reveal the rich trove of annoying traits in her public persona at the same time. She took on the role by immediately announcing her main task was to determine “the root causes” in the countries sending illegals off by the tens of thousands to make cartel coyotes rich, while hammering the southern border enforcement apparatus into virtual TKO mode. No need to mention why neither Chuckles or Bumbles will visit the border to see things for themselves. The term “optics” was coined for situations like this, and horrible optics barely hints at what would happen. So, back to “root causes.” I began my mulling by surmising that everything reduces to simple principles of human nature. And then I realized that you don’t have to talk about humans to illustrate “root causes;” nature itself, in the form of animals, provides the necessary insight. So here is one of the primary tenets of root cause in the political domain:If you feed the pigeons, you get more pigeons.Said another way, you get the behavior you reward and/or tolerate. This holds for pets, children, employees, and just about anything else that fits the model. You pay (feed) people to not work, and you get more people to not work. I submit that this is all you need to know about the root cause of the flood of illegals surging our southern border and overwhelming all aspects of so-called “enforcement.” If you prefer a more “nuanced” explanation, try this: root causes always boil down to three things: 1) policy, 2) humans pursuing their own self-interests, and 3) reality on the ground (not dreams). As this observer sees it, the Law of Pigeon Behavior captures the essence of the three pretty damn well. So, Chuckles, you can get someone on your staff to write up a one-pager on Root Causes and deliver it to the Oval Office staff. And then schedule your visit to the border, and invite the Good Humor Man to go along with you.On Critical Gender TheoryIbram X. Kendi has become the guru of our era on matters of race relations and is doing his level best to make them worse in every regard. By now, you should realize that the dream of Rev. Martin Luther King has been canceled, and you have to wonder why the National Holiday honoring him hasn’t been canceled as well. Kendi’s basic view of race relations is that all white people are racist. Further, if said white person protests that they are not racist, it just proves Kendi’s assertion. According to Professor Ibram, it is not feasible to be “not racist.” You must be “anti-racist” instead. So if you are not actively anti-racist, you are in fact racist. Game, set, match. You could say that to Kendi, race is a “black and white” issue. Kind of reminds me of the period when President Bush 43 proclaimed “you are either for us or against us” following the 9-11 attacks. Learned minds everywhere got the vapors. It occurred to me that this kind of thinking can be applied in the area of gender, which until recent years, had been a pretty simple issue. With very rare exceptions, when you came out of the womb on your first day of life, you were identified as male (boy) or female (girl) by noting the abundantly obvious difference between the two genders, and the attending professional making the call. Now, compare that to Kendi’s pronouncement that you are either racist or anti-racist; those are the only two rational choices in this era of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Oh, and unity coming our way from the Harris-Biden Administration. If we follow Kendi’s thought pattern, when it comes to gender, there ain’t no middle ground of confusion, subtle variation, “choice,” fluidity, transitions, or that catch-all – “non-binary.” You are a male or an anti-male. Those are your only two choices. No waffling, no double talk, no woke babbling. No in-betweens. You are a male, or you are an anti-male. Or if you prefer, you are a female or an anti-female in Kendi’s way of thinking. I choose to designate an anti-male a female, and an anti-female a male. It sort of boils down to apple and orange thinking if you follow the exalted guru’s manner of thinking. I wonder when he’ll come out with a new book on this revolutionary thinking that is a logical spin-off of his breakthrough theory of racism.On The Shooting Crime ExplosionIn the last two years, the statistics for shooting crimes, and related deaths, have exploded in a truly worrisome way. The coverage on a weekly basis is tragic, and sadly, has the effect of numbing us to the realities. Inevitably, the talking heads and everyone on the left who can find a camera to talk to (or social media) screams out in anguish that we have to do something about the huge increase in gun sales and ownership in the population at large. Allow me, if you will, to suggest what “we can do.“The key factor, of course, is naming the “we”, and slapping them upside the head with a 2 x 4.1. Stop talking about repealing the Second Amendment and/or tightening the laws of gun ownership for law-abiding, mentally competent citizens. 2. Stop threatening to confiscate lawfully owned firearms and searching personal premises to do so. 3. Stop promoting “Defund the Police.“ 4. Stop appointing District Attorneys who don’t believe in prosecuting criminals, and who oppose cash bail. 5. Get rid of Judges who believe in rehabilitation and early release of violent criminals. 6. Stop allowing rampaging looters and rioters to destroy whatever private and public property they want for whatever purpose they want, without any serious consequences. Stop telling us what our eyes see is not what is happening. 7. Stop defining law enforcement personnel as the problem and perpetrators as the oppressed. In other words, those of you who make and enforce the rules that are supposed to create law and order and safety for all, stop doing all the things that run counter to those very concepts. Stop motivating concerned citizens to load up on firearms because they can no longer depend on Public Safety Departments and the Criminal Justice system to protect their very lives. Really, this is not that hard. Just stop drinking the woke kool-aid cocktails, do your jobs, and follow the law. And if you choose to do just the opposite so you can get re-elected, or be praised in the right social and political settings, might I suggest you go straight to the Ninth Circle described in Dante’s Inferno. The WrapThis seems like a fine time to close with a pithy and brilliant quote:As T.S. Eliot said, more than fifty years ago, “Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm — but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.”
Senate Republicans invoked the filibuster on Tuesday, effectively killing (for the immediate future) the Democrats’ partisan power-grabbing legislation, S 1, which they had dubiously titled the For the People Act. Democrats and their Leftmedia propagandists dishonestly frame this as a “voting rights” bill, but make no mistake: It’s about Democrat power. All 50 Republicans held the line, while Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV, Trump +39) once again showed commitment to his party over the will of his own constituents and even his own expressed principles. Despite loudly declaring that he objected to such a partisan bill, even offering a slightly watered-down version, Manchin ultimately fell in line. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) pulled no punches in his denunciation of the legislation. “The rotten inner workings of Democrats’ S 1 power grab have been thoroughly exposed to the light,” he stated. “Whichever label Democrats slap on their bill, the substance remains the same.” Ironically, Democrat Congressman Jamaal Bowman unintentionally agreed with McConnell’s assessment: “If we deliver [S 1], we maintain power in 2022. If we don’t … then we risk losing power, and risk losing this moment in American history to really push a progressive Democratic agenda.” Prior to the vote, Joe Biden’s White House issued a BIG Lie statement asserting, “Democracy is in peril, here, in America. The right to vote — a sacred right in this country — is under assault with an intensity and an aggressiveness we have not seen in a long time.” Well, if Biden is truly concerned about the state of “democracy” in America, then he should be breathing a sigh of relief and thanking Republicans for boldly standing against a Democrat threat against our great Republic. But, of course, Biden would rather keep spinning the yarn that GOP election integrity laws in various states are “Jim Crow 2.0.” Senator Ted Cruz (TX) expertly turned the tables on this bogus talking point:That is a grotesque lie, and Mr. President, the majority leader knows that. The president of the United States knows that. The vice president of the United States [knows that]. They know they’re lying. But ironically, they’ve inadvertently said something that is accurate about this piece of legislation. Jim Crow legislation was grotesque and ugly. It was legislation that was drafted without exception by Democratic politicians. Jim Crow was written by Democratic politicians, and its purpose, when the Jim Crow laws were written, [was] to prevent the voters from ever voting out of office Democratic politicians. One of the ugliest chapters of our nation’s history. And thankfully, we repudiated Jim Crow. Well, the majority leader used the phrase Jim Crow 2.0, and inadvertently he’s right, but not about what he’s describing. He’s right about the ‘Corrupt Politicians Act.’ The ‘Corrupt Politicians Act’ follows the exact same pattern that Jim Crow did. It is partisan legislation written by elected Democrats, designed to keep elected Democrats in office and to steal the right to vote from the citizenry to decide on somebody else. Cruz is exactly right — the party with a history of suppressing voting rights has been and remains to this day the Democrat Party. Going all the way back to the first voting rights act, the 14th Amendment, it was Republicans who assured that the recently freed slaves were given full citizenship rights, and especially the right to vote. With the Voting Rights Act of 1965, it was once again Republicans who, more than Democrats, stepped up to get the law passed, ending the Democrats’ Jim Crow abuses of voter rights. And now, it is Republicans who have once again stepped up to protect the integrity of voting rights by ensuring that federalism is preserved, working to rebuild Americans’ confidence in an electoral system governed by standards of fairness and accuracy, and preventing the legitimate votes of Americans from being offset by fraudulent votes that Democrats aid with their bulk-mail ballot strategy. The fact of the matter is that no democratic republic can stand if the citizenry cannot trust the accuracy and legality of the vote. What S 1 would have done is sow ever more distrust and uncertainty in future elections. Finally, no matter the Democrats’ rhetoric, the fact of the matter is that the American people don’t see this legislation as being “for the people.” For example, the vast majority of Americans reject the Democrats’ opposition to voter ID. Furthermore, while Americans widely support mail-in voting, that comes with the caveat of more stringent verification requirements — commonsense protections to prevent voter fraud. The truth is, Republicans aren’t against people voting; they’re against voter fraud. Democrats, on the other hand, not only dismiss voter fraud outright, they irrationally claim that any concerns and attempts to mitigate it are “racist” and a threat to democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth. But, again, Congressman Bowman let the cat out of the bag: This is all about the 2022 election and keeping Democrats in power.
Ivermectin, a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic that also has anti-inflammatory activity, has shown remarkable success in preventing and treating COVID-19
The drug is available over-the-counter in some countries, such as France, and 3.7 billion doses have been administered in the last 40 years, with serious side effects extremely rare
Expert physicians have called on the NIH, CDC and FDA to review the expansive data on ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, keep those with early symptoms from progressing and help critically ill patients recover
Legal fights have ensued, with family members enlisting lawyers to battle hospital boards in order to give their dying loved ones the lifesaving pills — even when all other treatment options have been exhausted
Despite the undisputable data showing ivermectin works for COVID-19, it continues to be ignored in favor of more expensive, and less effective, treatments and mass experimental vaccination
There’s a medication that has been found to reduce COVID-19 mortality by 81%.1 The icing on the cake? It’s also safe, inexpensive and widely available, with decades of clinical usage suggesting it has a “high margin of safety.”2 The drug is ivermectin — a broad-spectrum anti-parasitic that also has anti-inflammatory activity.
There’s a good chance, however, that you probably haven’t heard about it. And, if you or a loved one had COVID-19, there’s also a high probability that you didn’t receive this potentially life-saving treatment, even though doctors have been begging health agencies to make it part of official COVID-19 treatment guidelines since nearly the start of the pandemic.
One professor and doctor, Hector Carvallo, who has found his science documenting ivermectin’s effectiveness for COVID-19 “quickly scrubbed from the internet,” wrote to colleagues, “I am afraid we have affected the most sensitive organ on humans: the wallet.”3
In June 2021, we’re at the point when the data on ivermectin are really undebatable. It’s a safe, existing option to treat COVID-19, and an alternative to vaccination, but if it were to become mainstream, it would make the COVID-19 vaccine Emergency Use Authorization disappear because, with a readily available treatment, there’s no need for mass, emergency vaccination.
Critical Care Physicians Developed COVID Treatment Early On
Early on in the pandemic, five critical care physicians formed the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC), which developed a highly effective COVID-19 treatment protocol known as MATH+.
One of those physicians, Dr. Paul Marik, a critical care doctor at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital in East Virginia, is renowned for his work in creating the “Marik Cocktail,” which significantly reduces death rates from sepsis using inexpensive, safe, generic medications.4
Not content to offer COVID-19 patients “supportive care,” which he describes as “no care at all,” he recruited some of the most knowledgeable pulmonary critical care specialists to solve the COVID-19 treatment puzzle, homing in on stopping the hyper-immune response — including multiorgan inflammation and clotting — which is what typically drives death in fatal COVID-19 cases.5
Marik told Mountain Home magazine, “As pulmonary critical care doctors we know how to treat inflammation and clotting, with corticosteroids and anticoagulants. It’s first-grade science.”6 The result was the MATH+ protocol for hospitalized COVID-19 patients mentioned earlier, which gets its name from:
Intravenous Methylprednisolone
High-dose intravenous Ascorbic acid (vitamin C)
Plus optional treatments Thiamine, zinc and vitamin D
Full dose low molecular weight Heparin
The MATH+ protocol led to high survival rates. Out of more than 100 hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with the MATH+ protocol as of mid-April 2020, only two died. Both were in their 80s and had advanced chronic medical conditions.7
After several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+8 while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+,9 due to the addition of ivermectin.
Ivermectin ‘Miracle Drug’ Silenced
In December 2020, FLCCC called for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.10,11 In one trial, 58 volunteers took 12 milligrams of ivermectin once per month for four months.
Only four (6.96%) came down with mild COVID-19 symptoms during the May through August 2020 trial period. In comparison, 44 of 60 health care workers (73.3%) who had declined the medication were diagnosed with COVID-19.12 Mountain Home reported:13
“‘If you were to say, tell me the characteristics of a perfect drug to treat COVID-19, what would you ask for?’ he [Marik] said. ‘I think you would ask firstly for something that’s safe, that’s cheap, that’s readily available, and has anti-viral and anti-inflammatory properties.
People would say, ‘That’s ridiculous. There could not possibly be a drug that has all of those characteristics. That’s just unreasonable. But we do have such a drug. The drug is called Ivermectin.’
If it was universally distributed at a dose that costs ten American cents in India and about the cost of a Big Mac in the United States, he said, Ivermectin would save countless lives, crush variants, eliminate the need for endless big pharma booster shots, and end the pandemic all over the world.”
In June 2020, a study also found ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro, with a single treatment leading to a 5,000-fold reduction in virus after 48 hours.14 What’s more, the drug is available over-the-counter in some countries, such as France, and 3.7 billion doses have been administered in the last 40 years, with serious side effects extremely rare.15
Dr. Pierre Kory, Marik’s protégé, and a part of the group that formed FLCCC, set out to get the word out to save lives, but his calls for widespread adoption of this “miracle” drug fell on deaf ears.
Senate Committee Ignores Data on Ivermectin
December 8, 2020, Kory testified to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which held a hearing on “Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution.” He called on the NIH, CDC and FDA to review the expansive data on ivermectin to prevent COVID-19, keep those with early symptoms from progressing and help critically ill patients recover:16,17
“‘We have a solution to this crisis,’ he said. ‘There is a drug that is proving to be of miraculous impact,’ Kory said. ‘When I say miracle, I do not use that term lightly. And I don’t want to be sensationalized when I say that.
It’s a scientific recommendation based on mountains of data that has emerged in the last three months … from many centers and countries around the world showing the miraculous effectiveness of Ivermectin. It basically obliterates transmission of this virus. If you take it, you will not get sick.’”
Despite his impassioned pleas and astonishing science to back them up, the treatment was not only ignored by the committee but promptly eviscerated. Mountain Home reported:18
“The hearing was dead before it started … The hearing was boycotted by all seven Democrats (who have received a total of $1.3 million in big pharma bucks from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Gilead, and others), and four of the seven Republicans, including Utah’s Mitt Romney (more than $3 million received from big pharma), Ohio’s Rob Portman ($542,400), and Florida’s Rick Scott (more than $1 million in stock in Gilead Sciences, maker of Remdesivir).”
Meanwhile, media reports claimed ivermectin was unproven and the World Health Organization also refused to endorse it. YouTube removed Kory’s testimony, which had nearly 9 million views, calling it a danger to the community.19 Still, the data surrounding ivermectin speaks for itself.
Ivermectin’s Impressive Data — and Legal Fights Over its Use
A scientific review by Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University, funded by the WHO and UNITAID and published January 18, 2021, found ivermectin reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%. It also increased viral clearance. This finding was based on a review of six randomized, controlled trials involving a total of 1,255 patients.20
Kory, Marik and colleagues also published their review based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19, which found “large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance.” They continued:21
“Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.”
While an increasing number of doctors and countries have adopted ivermectin’s use for COVID-19, many more refuse it, even going so far as to prohibit its use for patients. Legal fights have ensued, with family members enlisting lawyers to battle hospital boards in order to give their dying loved ones the lifesaving pills — even when all other treatment options have been exhausted.22
‘It’s Really Almost Totalitarian’
In mid-January 2021, the NIH finally revised its guidelines on ivermectin, in large part due to the data presented by Kory and others. However, while the NIH no longer warns against its use, they also do not outright recommend it, and they did not grant ivermectin emergency use authorization. The FDA continues to warn against the use of ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19.23
As a result, many patients in the U.S. still struggle to access the drug, as many doctors are unwilling to prescribe it off-label against health officials’ recommendations. The reality remains that inexpensive, generic pills like ivermectin are not the ones that Big Pharma intends to become the COVID-19 savior. As Kory told Mountain Home:24
“‘Only big randomized controlled trials by big pharma/big academic medical centers are accepted by big journals, while others are rejected,’ while only studies in big journals are accepted by big public health agencies for drug recommendations, and only drugs recommended by big public health agencies ‘escape media/social media censorship.’
‘This leaves you with a system where the only thing that’s considered to have sufficient evidence or proven efficacy is essentially a big new pharmaceutical drug … If it doesn’t come from the mountaintop, it doesn’t exist … The people on the ground, we cannot do any more science that’s considered credible.
We’re discredited as controversial and as promoting unproven therapies and our Facebook groups are shut down, Twitter accounts are locked, YouTube videos are removed and demonetized. It’s really almost totalitarian what’s happening when we’re just well-meaning scientists trying to do the right thing by our patients.’”
FLCCC has published its COVID-19 treatment protocols on its website and has answers to many frequently asked questions, including how to get ivermectin.25 FLCCC remains hopeful that ivermectin will be formally adopted into national or international COVID-19 treatment guidelines in the near future.
They also receive many questions from people wondering about COVID-19 vaccines, their safety and whether or not to get vaccinated. While FLCCC does not take a position for or against them, they state, “We can only say that, for those who cannot be vaccinated, ivermectin is an equally effective measure.”26
There are lots of reasons why wokeism spread like wildfire once America lost its collective mind during the pandemic, quarantine, self-induced recession, and rioting of 2020. Wokeism was never really about racism, sexism, or other -isms. Instead, for some, it illustrated a psychological pathology of projection: fobbing one’s own concrete prejudices onto others in order to alleviate or mask them. So should we laugh or cry that Black Lives Matter’s self-described Marxist co-founder turns out to be a corporate grifter? Patrisse Cullors has accumulated several upscale homes and is under investigation by the IRS for allegations of the misuse of funds from one of her foundations. Is it the case that the more Cullors professes Marxist ideology and damns toxic whiteness, so all the more she feels at home living in a $1.4 million Topanga Canyon home, in an almost exclusively ritzy white neighborhood? Consider outspoken liberal icon Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). He’s one of the Senate’s most woke. Yet Whitehouse turns out to be a mostly unapologetic member of a de facto all-white prestigious “beach club” of elites in Newport, Rhode Island. Is Whitehouse committed in the abstract to rooting out white privilege so he can concretely relax amid it with fellow bluebloods? Barack and Michelle Obama occasionally venture out of either their multimillion-dollar Washington, D.C. mansion or their Martha’s Vineyard estate to lecture the country on its systemic racism. They express worry over the dangers that apparently white people pose to the very safety of their own daughters. Does such sermonizing square the circle that the Obamas have no desire to return to their Chicago home—a city where nearly 700 African-American males were murdered in 2020, the vast majority by other black men? So far, Chicago in 2021 is on a trajectory to suffer over 30 percent more murder victims than last year. Joe Biden lectures America on its racism about every two weeks. And he unleashed the bureaucracies of the federal government to root out mythical white supremacist conspiracies. Does Medieval penance explain Biden’s fixation on systemic racism? After all, when he condemns anonymous white racists, does his outrage mitigate his son Hunter’s habitual use of the N-word and anti-Asian riffs? No Washington politico has compiled a longer record of racialist put-downs than Joe Biden. So apparently, the more Biden hunts for a white racist under every bed, the less necessary it becomes to look in the mirror or at least to beg his son Hunter to knock off his racist slurs. The second catalyst of wokeism is the distraction it provides from scary problems that threaten the very existence of American civilization. While the country consumes itself in demanding more than 12 percent representation of black actors in television commercials, it is nearing $30 trillion in national debt. Eventually, the astounding red ink will require recessionary belt-tightening, more inflationary money printing, or both. The woke Biden Administration cannot stop 2 million immigrants this year from crossing illegally and with exemption into the United States.Almost all are in need of free American health care, housing, food, and legal subsidies. Violent crime is spiking at an astonishing rate. Yet few dare say why that is—or how to stop it. America also cannot face the likely truth that Chinese researchers engineered a gain-of-function virus—with oversight from the Communist Chinese military and subsidies from Drs. Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak. So, instead of offering real solutions to these crises, we war with each other whether the deceased children’s book author Dr. Seuss or the plastic toy Mr. Potato Head was racist or otherwise exclusionary. When our elites are clueless about the national debt, inflation, illegal immigration, crime, soaring gas prices, and a global pandemic, they reassure themselves that at least they can cancel out Father Junípero Serra or knockdown another statue of Robert E. Lee. Finally, the hysterias of wokism are being channeled for profit—if they do not already reflect the reality of many of our most woke being the richest among us. One reason why Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Markle, and LeBron James hype charges of white racism is that their oppression reminds America that one can become rich as Croesus yet remain sympathetic victims. For next-generation grifters, like Ibram Xolani Kendi (a.k.a. Ibram Henry Rogers) and Robin DiAngelo, to claim that America was, is, and always will be racist, means more than just speaking gigs and book sales. The solutions for the pseudo-crises they invent are mass reeducation of self-confessional whites—with lucrative consulting fees for both, and tens of thousands of others. America is systematically being conned by those who disguise their hypocrisy, who manipulate the guilt-ridden, who have no interest in solving America’s most dangerous problems, and who get or stay richer by hyping an America in need of massive rebooting—and with it their own careerist remedies.
Our pro-life reporting is being attacked. So is the truth. We can’t back down in the fight against abortion!View this email in your browser **Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com
This is urgent.
As millions of Americans weigh the risks of taking the new, emergency-use Covid vaccines, U.S. government data released just a few days ago by the CDC shows a total of 358,379 reports of adverse reactions in all age groups after being inoculated.
But those very same pharmaceutical companies responsible for bringing COVID vaccines to market remain — remarkably — immune under federal law from liability for any harmful side effects, illnesses, injuries, or even deaths that result from them.
This is not only wrong — it’s deeply unsettling.
There’s never been a more pertinent time to revisit and rethink this irresponsible legal protection than now.
That’s why we launched our recent campaign to lobby federal legislators to change this outdated law, and finally prioritize the rights of the American people over Big Pharma, once and for all.CONTACT YOUR U.S. LAWMAKERS TODAY!And since we kicked things off only a couple of days ago, there’s still plenty of time to make your voice heard on this crucial matter.
That’s why we want to give you another chance, if you haven’t already, to contact your U.S. Senators and House Member and request that they work towards changing this law to ensure that Big Pharma is held accountable for the vaccines they bring to market.
You can contact your federal lawmakers in one easy step using this simple contact form that we’re making available here on LifeSite’s Action Center.
With one click, your message is sent directly to your representatives without having to look up any of their contact details.CONTACT YOUR U.S. LAWMAKERS TODAY!
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.
***
The European database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”
A subscriber from Europe recently emailed us and reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.
The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50, although there are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.
So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured due to COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through June 19, 2021 there are 15,472 deaths and 1,509,266 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:
From the total of injuries recorded, half of them (753,657) are serious injuries.
“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”
A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. This subscriber has volunteered to do this, and it is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.
Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.[1]
Here is the summary data through June 19, 2021.
Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 7,420 deaths and 560,256 injuries to 19/06/2021
16,133 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 81 deaths
12,637 Cardiac disorders incl. 964 deaths
101 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 6 deaths
33,936 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,759 deaths
209 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 11 deaths
1,117 Immune system disorders incl. 5 deaths
3,835 Infections and infestations incl. 234 deaths
2,480 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 77 deaths
2,670 Investigations incl. 89 deaths
1,297 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 85 deaths
15,131 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 77 deaths
128 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 15 deaths
21,684 Nervous system disorders incl. 424 deaths
255 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 2 death
20 Product issues
2,437 Psychiatric disorders incl. 69 deaths
807 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 52 deaths
459 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 1 death
5,640 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 399 deaths
6,538 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 28 deaths
504 Social circumstances incl. 13 deaths
397 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 38 deaths
3,432 Vascular disorders incl. 141 deaths
Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/AstraZeneca: 3,364 deaths and 793,036 injuries to 19/06/2021
9,136 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 132 deaths
12,135 Cardiac disorders incl. 396 deaths
95 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 2 deaths
212,663 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 891 deaths
525 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 25 deaths
3,085 Immune system disorders incl. 11 deaths
17,791 Infections and infestations incl. 217 deaths
7,854 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 77 deaths
16,731 Investigations incl. 79 deaths
9,765 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 50 deaths
123,637 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 45 deaths
332 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 8 deaths
169,286 Nervous system disorders incl. 532 deaths
223 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 4 deaths
103 Product issues
14,931 Psychiatric disorders incl. 27 deaths
2,809 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 29 deaths
5,967 Reproductive system and breast disorders
26,631 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 387 deaths
36,457 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 22 deaths
772 Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
671 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 16 deaths
17,066 Vascular disorders incl. 235 deaths
Total reactions for the experimental COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 541 deaths and 33, 331 injuries to 19/06/2021
306 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 16 deaths
496 Cardiac disorders incl. 56 deaths
14 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
177 Ear and labyrinth disorders
8 Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
383 Eye disorders incl. 3 deaths
3,086 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 23 deaths
8,761 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 137 deaths
52 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 4 deaths
85 Immune system disorders
392 Infections and infestations incl. 13 deaths
320 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 8 deaths
2,003 Investigations incl. 37 deaths
184 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 10 deaths
5,718 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 17 deaths
16 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps)
7,093 Nervous system disorders incl. 68 deaths
9 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
9 Product issues
355 Psychiatric disorders incl. 5 deaths
119 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 8 deaths
114 Reproductive system and breast disorders
1,130 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 43 deaths
804 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 2 deaths
72 Social circumstances incl. 3 deaths
336 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 26 deaths
1,289 Vascular disorders incl. 60 deaths
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Notes
[1] These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.
For the next week after that warning about hoop snakes on the prowl as veritable animal unicyclists, I looked hourly for hoop snakes—shovel in hand—but never found a single one or even their bike-tire like trails. Yet Joe Caron said he had grown up on the reservation and saw them hooping in packs a lot. (I have a confession to make: Until 21, I remember this childhood incident as just folk ignorance—or maybe a wild pun on us? But one day in graduate school while reading about the Gnostics, I came across the ouroboros or “mouth biter,” a mythical Greek snake creature (borrowed from the Egyptians) that alchemists and Gnostic philosophers adopted as iconic, likely because of its transcendent “circle of life” message of the tail ending at and consumed by the head, or a reminder of death and rebirth. And I silently apologized to the long-dead Joe the moment I saw that his mythologies were one with the ancients). So, Joe taught me a lot of things, although he rarely said more than a few phrases at a time—and that made his advice all the more listened to. “Wear long sleeves, boys, in the heat. It will cool you down when you think it makes you hotter.”And “Wear a scarf for the sweat. You never know when you need it.” Once he got the mail as we worked the vineyard near his mailbox, and he put the letters inside his hat and continued down the row without a thought. As I wrote, we had another worker from the Azores, a master tractor driver and mechanic who lived next to us too, Carlos Silva. Carlos went often on a mean drunk. As a philosopher of sorts, he was occasionally cruel in his assessments. And every time I saw Carlos, I said to him “Well, Joe said.” And he would belly laugh and would say, “Well, Joe’s a simple, stupid man, a fool that Joe Caron is.” And he chuckled at the effect of his slanders of our hero Joe. Snitch that I was, I would always tell my grandfather on Carlos. But he’d say only, “Well, Carlos’s a master tractor driver and he can take apart the old Oliver tractor blindfolded. And Joe’s a saint but can’t do that. So, they’re different, just different.” Joe warned us about eagles and even hawks that snatch people (as I wrote earlier of our childhood fears). He warned me not to enter the eucalyptus wilds nearby (as I wrote as well), and said, “If you ever get lost in there, yell out and I’ll hear you from home.” Joe told me of contests under the vines between black widows and mud daubers. I told him black widows were the most dangerous things in the world and would kill us all with one brief bite (we saw dozens as we picked each row). And I remember he said, “Well, listen, Mr. Vic. A good blue mud wasp will kill ‘em every time. They just drag them widows into their mud holes on the stumps. Pile-em in. When they’re done eating them up, just a bunch of legs, all’s left.”After that on Joe’s advice, I never smashed another mud dauber but did open up their mud holes looking for spider legs. His uniform was khaki pants, khaki long sleeve shirt, straw hat, a blue or red scarf around his neck, and ankle-high thick leather boots. As I grew older, Joe slowed down and we got stronger. So, then he trailed rather than led us down the row. When I told my mom about working with Joe, she seemed somehow redeemed about the occasional putdowns from college friends that she had graduated from Stanford law school and yet gone right back into genteel poverty in a tiny house with three kids and my dad. I think what she saw on the coast had worried her, and she wanted us to grow up as she had, not just with empathy for, but with friendship as equals with, the hard men of the earth. I think it was in my last year in high school, the county came out, inspected Joe’s house, declared it “substandard” and then told my grandfather to move Joe and his elderly and infirm wife out. Joe had lived there rent-free as part of the job. We later remodeled it, and my dad lived there until he died. Odd thing is that Joe’s house was far better than the current ramshackle trailers, the tents, and the shacks that in the dozens mark the same avenue today. These shacks are mostly rented to illegal aliens, who, along with their landlords, are strangely exempt from the sort of rules and regulations that 50 years ago shut down Joe’s house. Ah, progress! Anytime, I have faced real adversity, I think I can somehow get through because at 5, 6, and onto 16, I worked with Joe Caron and thought him a model, and even learned to take the good in men like Carlos Silva and ignore the bad. The 1950s and 1960s are now fading shadows of memories, or as Hesiod would say, thoughts only of “work on work on top of work” from sunrise to sunset. My grandfather would say “Meet Joe with your weed shovels in the old vineyard between the ponds at 7 AM.” We would lag out at 7:30 and Joe was already covered with sweat from starting at 6 AM. He’d say only with a smile, “Now with you boys out here, we will get done before the heat and then we can all house up in the afternoon.” I can remember his smile that day. He was missing two teeth on one side and three on the bottom. I still think we were blessed that my mother and grandfather made sure we were raised amid the likes of Joe Caron, Carlos Silva, and the childhood gardens of hoop-snakes and the epic fights between black widows and mud daubers that all taught me in so many strange ways that it was what a man, any man of any color or of age or of education, could do, and not what he said or others said or thought he could do, that mattered. And we came to see later on that Joe Caron alone, with nothing but his ethos, was a saint, and so many others we met along the way with everything but an ethos were sinners.
The Fear of and Reverence for the “Hoop Snake”Part Two: By:Victor Davis HansonVictor Davis Hanson // Private PapersJune 25, 2021 For the next week after that warning about hoop snakes on the prowl as veritable animal unicyclists, I looked hourly for hoop snakes—shovel in hand—but never found a single one or even their bike-tire like trails. Yet Joe Caron said he had grown up on the reservation and saw them hooping in packs a lot. (I have a confession to make: Until 21, I remember this childhood incident as just folk ignorance—or maybe a wild pun on us? But one day in graduate school while reading about the Gnostics, I came across the ouroboros or “mouth biter,” a mythical Greek snake creature (borrowed from the Egyptians) that alchemists and Gnostic philosophers adopted as iconic, likely because of its transcendent “circle of life” message of the tail ending at and consumed by the head, or a reminder of death and rebirth. And I silently apologized to the long-dead Joe the moment I saw that his mythologies were one with the ancients). So, Joe taught me a lot of things, although he rarely said more than a few phrases at a time—and that made his advice all the more listened to. “Wear long sleeves, boys, in the heat. It will cool you down when you think it makes you hotter.”And “Wear a scarf for the sweat. You never know when you need it.” Once he got the mail as we worked the vineyard near his mailbox, and he put the letters inside his hat and continued down the row without a thought. As I wrote, we had another worker from the Azores, a master tractor driver and mechanic who lived next to us too, Carlos Silva. Carlos went often on a mean drunk. As a philosopher of sorts, he was occasionally cruel in his assessments. And every time I saw Carlos, I said to him “Well, Joe said.” And he would belly laugh and would say, “Well, Joe’s a simple, stupid man, a fool that Joe Caron is.” And he chuckled at the effect of his slanders of our hero Joe. Snitch that I was, I would always tell my grandfather on Carlos. But he’d say only, “Well, Carlos’s a master tractor driver and he can take apart the old Oliver tractor blindfolded. And Joe’s a saint but can’t do that. So, they’re different, just different.” Joe warned us about eagles and even hawks that snatch people (as I wrote earlier of our childhood fears). He warned me not to enter the eucalyptus wilds nearby (as I wrote as well), and said, “If you ever get lost in there, yell out and I’ll hear you from home.” Joe told me of contests under the vines between black widows and mud daubers. I told him black widows were the most dangerous things in the world and would kill us all with one brief bite (we saw dozens as we picked each row). And I remember he said, “Well, listen, Mr. Vic. A good blue mud wasp will kill ‘em every time. They just drag them widows into their mud holes on the stumps. Pile-em in. When they’re done eating them up, just a bunch of legs, all’s left.”After that on Joe’s advice, I never smashed another mud dauber but did open up their mud holes looking for spider legs. His uniform was khaki pants, khaki long sleeve shirt, straw hat, a blue or red scarf around his neck, and ankle-high thick leather boots. As I grew older, Joe slowed down and we got stronger. So, then he trailed rather than led us down the row. When I told my mom about working with Joe, she seemed somehow redeemed about the occasional putdowns from college friends that she had graduated from Stanford law school and yet gone right back into genteel poverty in a tiny house with three kids and my dad. I think what she saw on the coast had worried her, and she wanted us to grow up as she had, not just with empathy for, but with friendship as equals with, the hard men of the earth. I think it was in my last year in high school, the county came out, inspected Joe’s house, declared it “substandard” and then told my grandfather to move Joe and his elderly and infirm wife out. Joe had lived there rent-free as part of the job. We later remodeled it, and my dad lived there until he died. Odd thing is that Joe’s house was far better than the current ramshackle trailers, the tents, and the shacks that in the dozens mark the same avenue today. These shacks are mostly rented to illegal aliens, who, along with their landlords, are strangely exempt from the sort of rules and regulations that 50 years ago shut down Joe’s house. Ah, progress! Anytime, I have faced real adversity, I think I can somehow get through because at 5, 6, and onto 16, I worked with Joe Caron and thought him a model, and even learned to take the good in men like Carlos Silva and ignore the bad. The 1950s and 1960s are now fading shadows of memories, or as Hesiod would say, thoughts only of “work on work on top of work” from sunrise to sunset. My grandfather would say “Meet Joe with your weed shovels in the old vineyard between the ponds at 7 AM.” We would lag out at 7:30 and Joe was already covered with sweat from starting at 6 AM. He’d say only with a smile, “Now with you boys out here, we will get done before the heat and then we can all house up in the afternoon.” I can remember his smile that day. He was missing two teeth on one side and three on the bottom. I still think we were blessed that my mother and grandfather made sure we were raised amid the likes of Joe Caron, Carlos Silva, and the childhood gardens of hoop-snakes and the epic fights between black widows and mud daubers that all taught me in so many strange ways that it was what a man, any man of any color or of age or of education, could do, and not what he said or others said or thought he could do, that mattered. And we came to see later on that Joe Caron alone, with nothing but his ethos, was a saint, and so many others we met along the way with everything but an ethos were sinners.
Can Francis “Conservative” Collaborators be “Proximate to Heresy” & can Popes be Heretics?
– “[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… But he cannot err when he is in cathedra, that is, when he intends to make an instruction and decree for the guidance of the whole Church, when he means to confirm his brethren as supreme pastor, and to conduct them into the pastures of the faith.” (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306, 307 and https://wherepeteris.com/st-francis-de-sales-on-the-pope-as-the-guarantor-of-orthodoxy-and-unity-in-the-church/)
– [Francis’s] Fratelli Tutti is a bizarre doc, e.g., “We clearly state” is not a papal definition. “Tutti”, Amoris Laetitia, Abu Dhabi, etc., will be burned by a future pope/council. I hope Pell’s return might put some steel in the spines of Burke, Schneider, et al. Call an imperfect council! – Steven O’Reilly [https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/10/bizarre-francis-fratelli-tutti-steven.html and https://twitter.com/S_OReilly_USA%5D
– Lewis is a Mottramist. He has repeatedly explained that if the current Pope says not-A, while all previous popes have said A, then the current pope is right. And those who say he is wrong are haters. – Fr. VF[https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/07/vatican-i-expert-fr-rippinger-proximate.html]
This year, Where Peter Is Mike Lewis and his so-called “conservative” Catholic Francis collaborators have continued in their campaign for COVID totalitarian tyranny and in calling Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò a “dissident cleric” which is an approximate term for a “heretic.” [https://wherepeteris.com/catholic-media-and-critical-thinking/]
Might Fratelli Tutti and Amoris Laetitia promoter Lewis be a “dissident” heretic or at least “proximate to heresy”?
Lewis appears to believe that Francis’s Amoris Laetitia teaching allowing Communion for adulterers is infallible.
Moreover, Lewis who is a Pachamama worship apologist apparently thinks Francis cannot fall into heresy because he is definitely the pope and “ALL” his “statements… are infallible.”
Here is what Vatican I expert Fr. Chad Ripperger, PhD, in his book “Magisterial Authority” says to Lewis who it appears is “proximate to heresy”:
“[T]reat[ing] ALL papal statements as if they are infallible… is proximate to heresy because it rejects the precise formulation of the conditions of infallibility as laid out in by Vatican I… by essentially saying that the pope is infallible regardless of conditions.”
“… Worse still, those who were to follow a pope who was in error in a non-infallible teaching which is taught contrary to something that is infallible is not, therefore, excused.” (Magisterial Authority, Pages 5-14)
Is it possible that so-called “conservative” Catholic Francis collaborators could be a heretics and “not, therefore, excused”?
Next question, can popes be heretics?
Here is a short summary of the question from Catholic scholar Michael Davies:
The problem which would face the Church if a legitimately reigning pope became an heretic has been discussed in numerous standard works of reference. The solution is provided in the 1913 edition of The Catholic Encyclopedia: “The Pope himself, if notoriously guilty of heresy, would cease to be pope because he would cease to be a member of the Church.”(2) Many theologians have discussed the possibility of a pope falling into heresy, and the consensus of their opinion concurs with that of The Catholic Encyclopedia. The Pope must evidently be a Catholic, and if he ceased to be a Catholic he could hardly remain the Vicar of Christ, the head of the Mystical Body. St. Robert Bellarmine taught: “The manifestly heretical pope ceases per se to be pope and head as he ceases per se to be a Christian and member of the Church, and therefore he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the early Fathers.”(3) Saint Robert was, of course, discussing a theoretical possibility, and believed that a pope could not become an heretic and thus could not be deposed, but he also acknowledged that the more common opinion was that the pope could become an heretic, and he was thus willing to discuss what would need to be done if, per impossible, this should happen: “This opinion (that the Pope could not become an heretic) is probable and easily defended . . . Nonetheless, in view of the fact that this is not certain, and that the common opinion is the opposite one, it is useful to examine the solution to this question, within the hypothesis that the Pope can be an heretic.”(4) The great Jesuit theologian, Francisco de Suarez (1548-1617) was also sure that God’s “sweet providence” would never allow the one who could not teach error to fall into error, and that this was guaranteed by the promise Ego autem rogavi pro te . . . (Luke 22: 32). But, like Bellarmine, Suarez was willing to consider the possibility of an heretical pope as an hypothesis, particularly in view of the fact, he claimed, that several “general councils had admitted the hypothesis in question”.(5) Saint Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787) did not believe that God would ever permit a Roman Pontiff to become a public or an occult heretic, even as a private person: “We ought rightly to presume as Cardinal Bellarmine declares, that God will never let it happen that a Roman Pontiff, even as a private person, becomes a public heretic or an occult heretic.”(6) If, per impossible, a pope became a formal heretic through pertinaciously denying a de fide doctrine, how would the faithful know that he had forfeited his office as he had ceased to be a Catholic? It must be remembered that no one in the Church, including a General Council, has the authority to judge the Popes. Reputable authorities teach that if a pope did pertinaciously deny a truth which must be believed by divine and Catholic faith, after this had been brought to his attention by responsible members of the hierarchy (just as St. Paul reproved St. Peter to his face), a General Council could announce to the Church that the Pope, as a notorious heretic, had ceased to be a Catholic and hence had ceased to be Pope. It is important to note that the Council would neither be judging nor deposing the Pope, since it would not possess the authority for such an act. It would simply be making a declaratory sentence, i.e. declaring to the Church what had already become manifest from the Pope’s own actions. This is the view taken in the classic manual on Canon Law by Father F.X. Wernz, Rector of the Gregorian University and Jesuit General from 1906 to 1914. This work was revised by Father P. Vidal and was last republished in 1952. It states clearly that an heretical Pope is not deposed in virtue of the sentence of the Council, but “the General Council declares the fact of the crime by which the heretical pope has separated himself from the Church and deprived himself of his dignity.”(7) Other authorities believe that such a declaration could come from the College of Cardinals or from a representative group of bishop, while others maintain that such a declaration would not be necessary. What all those who accept the hypothesis of an heretical pope are agreed upon is that for such a pope to forfeit the papacy his heresy would have to be “manifest”, as Saint Robert Bellarmine expressed it, that is notorious and public (notorium et palam divulgata).(8) A notorious offence can be defined as one for which the evidence is so certain that it can in no way be either hidden or excused.(9) A pope who, while not being guilty of formal heresy in the strict sense, has allowed heresy to undermine the Church through compromise, weakness, ambiguous or even gravely imprudent teaching remains Pope, but can be judged by his successors, and condemned as was the case with Honorius I. [https://www.olrl.org/misc/sedevacant_md.shtml]Now, a longer summary:
Here is the answer from a POPE to so-called “conservative” Catholic Francis collaborators and all the Francis apologists who claim that a heretical pope can’t be judged by the Church:
Pope Innocent III (1198-1216) in “Si Papa”:
“‘Let no mortal being have the audacity to reprimand a Pope on account of faults, for he whose duty it is to judge all men cannot be judged by anybody, unless he should be called to the task of having deviated from the faith. (Si Papa)'” “Pope Innocent III: ‘For me the faith is so necessary that, whereas for other sins my only judge is God, for the slightest sin in the matter of the faith I could be judged by the Church.’ (propter solum peccatum quod in fide commititur possem ab Ecclesia judican)” (The Remnant, “Answering a Sedevacantist Critic,” March 18, 2015)
It is objected 1°. — This opinion stands contrary to the more common and ancient opinion of the doctors of the school. It is responded: That is true. But in questions not yet defined and permitted to the free disputation of the schools, it can happen that a more recent and less common opinion is true and ought at length to be recognized as such. It is objected 2°. — Moreover, it stands contrary to the authority of Innocent III, whose words these are in the third sermon for the anniversary of his consecration: Faith is so necessary to me, that, while I have God for my judge in other sins, I am able to be judged by the Church on account of the sin which is committed against faith (see Sylvius, In IIamIIæ S. Thomæ, tom. III, q. xxxix, art. 3, concl. 2). It is responded: Indeed, in that text Innocent III supposes that the Roman Pontiff can, as a private person, fall into heresy. But Innocent III spoke thus, following the opinion which was more accepted in his time; nor did he pronounce it as the Pontiff defining the faith; whence it can be said that in this, he erred. But this error of his is not heresy, because this proposition, the Pope cannot become a heretic even privately, even if it be true, is yet not an evident or defined ARTICLE OF FAITH. Therefore the cited dictum of Innocent III indeed favors the opinion which holds that the Pope can become a heretic privately; yet it does not have peremptory force. It is objected 3°. — The canon Si papa (from the acta of Boniface of Mainz, in Gratian, dist. XL, c. vi) affirms that the Pope is exempt from the jurisdiction of his inferiors, with this exception: Unless he be discovered to have deviated from the faith. And in a similar document of the fifth council under Pope Symmachus it is read: Unless he should deviate from the right faith. Therefore, even in remote antiquity the doctrine held sway undoubted, that the Pope could become a heretic[https://lumenscholasticum.wordpress.com/2019/05/05/bouix-on-the-pope-heretic/] It is objected 3°. — The canon Si papa (from the acta of Boniface of Mainz, in Gratian, dist. XL, c. vi) affirms that the Pope is exempt from the jurisdiction of his inferiors, with this exception: Unless he be discovered to have deviated from the faith. And in a similar document of the fifth council under Pope Symmachus it is read: Unless he should deviate from the right faith. Therefore, even in remote antiquity the doctrine held sway undoubted, that the Pope could become a heretic.[https://lumenscholasticum.wordpress.com/2019/05/05/bouix-on-the-pope-heretic/]
Finally, one of the greatest modern theologian Fr. Ioachim Ioachim whom “Msgr. Clifford Fenton in a March 1953 article of the American Ecclesiastical Review [said] ‘holds very much the same position in the theological world of the mid-twentieth century that Cardinal Billot occupied in that of fifty years ago'” appears to disagree with their opinion. In Salaverri’s De Ecclesia Christi, it says:
1056. The doctrine of the Church. The first part is implicitly defined in the Council of Florence’s decree for the Jacobites: D 714. But concerning heretics and apostates, we deduce our teaching also from the formula of faith “Clemens Trinitas”, from can. 23 of the Second Lateran Council, and from the Bull Ineffabilis Deus of Pius IX: D 18 367 1641.
The second part, in which we hold that those excommunicated by perfect excommunication, which the Supreme Pontiff can determine, are separated from the body of the Church, is taught as Catholic doctrine by Pius XII in the encyclical Mystici corporis: AAS 35 (1943) 202ff. 1057. This whole thesis of ours is clearly taught by Pius XII and the Catechism of the Council of Trent.[16]
Pius XII writes: “But in truth, only those are to be numbered amongst the members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration and profess the true faith, who have not miserably separated themselves from the community of the Church or through most grave crimes been separated by the legitimate authority…For this reason, those who are divided from one another in faith or government are unable to live in the one Body of this sort and in its divine Spirit…Nor should it be thought that the Body of the Church, because it is insigned with the name of Christ, consists, even in this time of terrestrial pilgrimage, only of members outstanding in sanctity, or that it is constituted only of the company of those who are predestined by God to sempiternal felicity…Indeed not every crime, even if a grave wickedness, is of such kind that of its very nature it separates man from the Body of the Church—as do schism, heresy, or apostasy.”
In the Catechism of the Council of Trent we read:
“Only three sorts of men are excluded from the Church: firstly, infidels, then heretics and schismatics, and finally excommunicates: pagans indeed, because they have never been in the Church, nor ever known it, nor been made partakers of any Sacrament in the society of the Christian people; heretics and schismatics, because they have revolted from the Church, for they no more pertain to the Church, than do deserters to the army from which they have defected: yet it must not be denied that they are in the power of the Church, as ones who may be called to judgment by her, punished, and condemned by anathema. Finally also excommunicates, because by the judgment of the Church have they been excluded from her, and do not belong to her communion until they come to their senses. But concerning other men, though they be wicked and criminal, it is not to be doubted that they yet persevere in the Church.”
1058. Dogmatic value. The first part, concerning heretics, apostates, and schismatics, is implicitly defined, particularly in the Council of Florence: D 714. The second part, on excommunicates by perfect excommunication, is Catholic doctrine, especially from the words of the encyclical of Pius XII, Mystici corporis Christi, recently cited by us above.
1059. The first part is proved. Heretics, apostates, and schismatics are not members of the Church…
… For the minor. That formal and manifest heretics, apostates, and schismatics formally and manifestly have severed the essential social bond of the Church’s faith or government, is clear from the notions themselves. Thus they are not of the Church, which is the congregation of the faithful, because schismatics are not congregated and heretics are not faithful.
1060. The same doctrine is confirmed by the authority of testimonies of the holy Fathers.
a) On heretics. Tertullian: “If they are heretics, they cannot be Christians” (R 298). St. Hilary: “I am a Catholic; I do not wish to be a heretic. I am a Christian, not an Arian.” St. Jerome: “Heretics pass judgment upon themselves, receding from the Church of their own will.” St. Augustine: “Sever yourselves from the members of the Church, sever yourselves from its Body. But what still might I say, in order that they might segregate themselves from the Church, since they have already done this? For they are heretics; they are already without.” The controversy on the rebaptizing of heretics, which was agitated thence from the middle of the third century, supposed as recognized by all that heretics are outside of the Church.[17]
b) On schismatics. Cyprian: “But what pertains to the person of Novatian…you know that we in the first place ought not to be inquisitive of what he taught, since he taught from without. Whosoever he is and of whatever condition, he is not a Christian who is not in the Church of Christ…he who neither held fast to fraternal charity nor ecclesiastical unity, has lost even that which he was previously.” St. Jerome: “Between heresy and schism, we think there to be this difference, that heresy imports perverse dogma; schism, on account of episcopal dissension, separates from the Church…moreover, no schism does not fabricate for itself a heresy, so that it might seem to have receded from the Church rightly.” St. Augustine: “Heretics and schismatics call their congregations churches. But heretics, thinking falsely about God, violate the faith itself; but schismatics burst free of fraternal charity through hostile divisions, although they believe those things which we believe. For this reason, heretics do not belong to the Catholic Church, because she loves God, nor schismatics, because she loves the neighbor” (R 1562). St. Fulgentius: “Most firmly hold and doubt not at all, that every one baptized outside of the Catholic Church is unable to become a partaker of eternal life, if before the end of this life he has not returned and been incorporated to the Catholic Church. Most steadily and in no way doubt, that not only all pagans, but also all Jews and all heretics and schismatics, who finish this present life outside of the Catholic Church, are to enter into the eternal fire” (R 2274-5). Pelagius I: “Pollute not a mind ever Catholic by any communion of schismatics. It is clear that the Body of Christ is one, the Church is one…our Savior taught: a vine separated from the grapevine cannot be good for anything, but fire for burning…Do not think that they either are or can be called the Church. And indeed since, as we have said, the Church is one…it is clear that there is no other but that which is founded in the apostolic root.”[18] [https://lumenscholasticum.wordpress.com/2016/12/05/fr-salaverri-on-whether-heretics-apostates-schismatics-and-excommunicates-are-members-of-the-church/]
Lastly, if Francis is a heretic, what should canonically happen to him?
Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic?
On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinger (and future Pope Benedict), head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of “homosex civil unions” was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy:
“Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil… The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions.” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons,” June 3, 2003)
Gloria.tv reported:
“Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in support of [immoral] homosex civil unions, admitting that he has always stood up for them. This is true.” [https://www.gloria.tv/post/J4jp2BJtWgpv3s8DiS2ThH2dk]
If Francis is a heretic, what should canonically happen to him?
If it is true that Francis is an explicit heretic then the teaching of St. Francis de Sales comes into play.
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)
The renowned scholar Arnaldo Xavier de Silveira who was one of the top experts in modern times of the subjects of papal validity and heretical popes gave a brief overview of his authority on this matters:
“In the 1970 Brazilian edition of my study of the heretical Pope, in the French edition of 1975 and in the Italian in 2016, I stated that on the grounds of the intrinsic theological reasons underpinning the Fifth Opinion I considered it not merely probable but certain. I chose not to insist on the qualification ‘theologically certain’ for an extrinsic reason, namely, that certain authors of weight do not adopt it.43 This was also the opinion of the then Bishop of Campos, Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, as expressed in a letter of 25th January 1974, when he sent my work to Paul VI, asking him to point out any possible errors (which never took place), expressly stating that he referred to the study ‘written by lawyer Arnaldo Vidigal Xavier da Silveira, with the contents of which I associate myself .’” [https://www.scribd.com/document/374434852/Arnaldo-Vidigal-Xavier-Da-Silveira-Replies-to-Fr-Gleize-on-Heretical-Pope]
Here is what de Silveira says in his book “Implications Of New Missae And Heretic Popes (Page 176)” on the subject of heretical popes:
“Conclusion
“Resuming: We believe that a careful examination of the question of a Pope heretic, with the theological elements of which we dispose today, permits one to conclude that an eventual Pope heretic would lose his charge in the moment in which his heresy became ‘notorious and publicly divulged’.”
“And we think that this sentence is not only intrinsically probable , but certain , since the reasons allegeable in its defense appear to us as absolutely cogent. Besides, in the works which we have consulted, we have not found any argument which persuaded us of the opposite. “
“(1 ) The second opinion referred by Saint Robert Bellarmine – See pp. 1 56 ft.
(2) The first subdivision proposed by us to the fifth opinion referred by Saint Robert Bellarmine – See p. 170.
(3) The second subdivision which we proposed to the fifth opinion – See p. 170.
(4) The third subdivision which we proposed on the fifth opinion. – See p. 1 70.
(5) The fourth opinion referred by Saint Robert Bellarmine . – See pp. 161 ff.
(6) We transcribe that long argumentation on pp. 1 64 ff. – See also note 2 of p. 1 64.
(7) One ought not to see shades of conciliarism in the principle that ecclesiastical organisms, as the Council, can omit a pronouncement declaring the eventual cessation of functions of a Pope heretic, as long as these organisms do not claim for themselves any right other than that enjoyed by any one of the faithful. For motives of mere convenience or courtesy, it could behoove these organisms to make such a declaration, in the first place; but this priority would not constitute for them a right of their own, or even less exclusive.”[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
Dr. John R. T. Lamont, philosopher and theologian, explains the procedures of how Francis’s papacy could cease if he is declared a heretical pope by the Church:
“Some… argue that the dubia and other criticisms of Amoris Laetitia that have been made already suffice as warnings to Pope Francis, and hence that he can now be judged to be guilty of the canonical crime of heresy…”
But for juridical purposes – especially for the very serious purpose of judging a Pope to be a heretic – they do not suffice. The evidence needed for a juridical judgment of such gravity has to take a form that is entirely clear and beyond dispute. A formal warning from a number of members of the College of Cardinals that is then disregarded by the Pope would constitute such evidence.”
“The possibility of a Pope being canonically guilty of heresy has long been admitted in the Church. It is acknowledged in the Decretals of Gratian There is no dispute among Catholic theologians on this point – even among theologians like Bellarmine who do not think that a Pope is in fact capable of being a heretic…”
“It is to be hoped that the correction of Pope Francis does not have to proceed this far, and that he will either reject the heresies he has announced or resign his office…”
“Removing him from office against his will would require the election of a new Pope, and would probably leave the Church with Francis as an anti-Pope contesting the authority of the new Pope. If Francis refuses to renounce either his heresy or his office, however, this situation will just have to be faced.”
Finally,unambiguously, Cardinal Burke, in an interview with the World Catholic Report, said that if a pope “formally profess heresy… he would cease…to be the Pope”:
Cardinal Burke: If a Pope would formally profess heresy he would cease, by that act, to be the Pope. It’s automatic. And so, that could happen.
CWR: That could happen.
Cardinal Burke: Yes.
CWR: That’s a scary thought.
Cardinal Burke: It is a scary thought, and I hope we won’t be witnessing that at any time soon.
CWR: In hindsight, with all of the controversy that has surrounded this, should you have kept these concerns to yourself and just waited for His Holiness to answer your dubia?
Cardinal Burke: No, not at all, because the faithful and priests and bishops have the right to have these questions answered. It was our duty as cardinals, when the Pope made it clear that he would not respond to them, to make them public so that the priests and the lay faithful who had these same doubts might know that their doubts are legitimate and that they deserve a response.
CWR: Some consider you to be an enemy of Pope Francis. How do you see yourself in relation to him?
Cardinal Burke: I am a Cardinal of the Church, and one of the Pope’s principal co-workers. I have absolute respect for the Petrine office. If I didn’t care about him and his exercise of the Petrine office, I would just remain silent and let everything go as it is. But because in conscience I believe he has an obligation to clarify these matters for the Church, I made it known to him, not just on this occasion, but on other occasions. The publication of the dubia was done with complete respect for his office. I am not the enemy of the Pope.
CWR: Back to this question about the Pope committing heresy. What happens then, if the Pope commits heresy and is no longer Pope? Is there a new conclave? Who’s in charge of the Church? Or do we just not even want to go there to start figuring that stuff out?
Cardinal Burke: There is already in place the discipline to be followed when the Pope ceases from his office, even as happened when Pope Benedict XVI abdicated his office. The Church continued to be governed in the interim between the effective date of his abdication and the inauguration of the papal ministry of Pope Francis.
CWR: Who is competent to declare him to be in heresy?
Cardinal Burke: It would have to be members of the College of Cardinals.[https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2016/12/19/cardinal-burke-no-i-am-not-saying-that-pope-francis-is-in-heresy/]Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He want 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)
– 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.
The founder of Dubai, Sheikh Rashid, was asked about the future of his country, and he replied, “My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I ride a Mercedes, my son rides a Land Rover, and my grandson is going to ride a Land Rover…but my great-grandson is going to have to ride a camel again.”
Why is that, he was asked? And his reply was, “Hard times create strong men, strong men create easy times.Easy times create weak men, weak men create difficult times. Many will not understand it, but you have to raise warriors, not parasites.”
And add to that the historical reality that all great empires…the Persians, the Trojans, the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, and in later years, the British..all rose and perished within 240 years. They were not conquered by external enemies; they rotted from within.
America has now passed that 240 year mark, and the rot is starting to be visible and is accelerating. We are past the Mercedes and Land Rover Years….the camels are on the horizon.
Last November Americans voted for Biden and demonstrated either that they know nothing about history or they think we should all be riding camels….
Our pro-life reporting is being attacked. So is the truth. We can’t back down in the fight against abortion!
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.