St. Michael: The Sure Remedy to Trump Socialist Anarchy

By David Martin

While a Trump victory on Tuesday seems probable, it is very improbable that the radical-left would take it sitting down. Already business owners across America are boarding up in anticipation of election-night madness. 

It was even reported last week that a left-wing coalition in Minnesota is planning mass civil unrest if President Trump wins the election on Tuesday night. This is not to mention a new report of 250 anarchists in the NYC area that are organizing riots and clashes with Trump supporters.

We indeed could have a national nightmare on our hands — riots could become commonplace overnight — but Christian America needs to remember that it has at its disposal a simple piece of ammunition that could make all the difference in this battle: the short prayer to St. Michael the Archangel for defeating Satan. Because in the final analysis, this leftist attack on America and Trump is being generated by Satan and his cohorts. Coalitions like Antifa and the Socialist deep-state are merely pawns that the devil is using to try to bring down America via revolution. 

People need to understand that this is no mere political contest but a spiritual war between the forces of good and evil — the final battle to save America — and that they have a real winner they can turn to. For as it was the Archangel Michael who first hurled Lucifer and his minions into the abyss so this great Archangel stands ready to bind Satan and keep America safe if we will simply invoke him. 

If even a fraction of the population said the prayer to St. Michael right now it would likely inspire many more votes for Trump and open the way for a smooth transition into 2021, but the problem is that very few religious leaders are willing to say anything along these lines. The U.S. Bishops have push-button power to make the difference but it appears that fear and political correctness are binding them.

One Good Bishop Could Save America 

Would that the bishops came forward to mobilize the troops by exhorting them to say the traditional Prayer to St. Michael! If even one influential prelate issued a brief statement exhorting the Church Militant to arm itself with this prayer it no doubt would result in thousands if not millions of Catholics saying this powerful prayer across our country right now. 

This is not to mention the many non-Catholic patriots who might take to this prayer and spread it to their friends. It could be a marvelous evangelistic tool to convert non-Catholics, and who is to say that President Trump himself wouldn’t tweet a few lines encouraging people everywhere to say the St. Michael Prayer. If he knew that St. Michael was the Patron of Police and saw an exemplary prelate like Archbishop Viganò recommending this prayer, he might just take it away! 

In the Book of Daniel it says: “At that time shall Michael rise up, the great prince, who standeth for the children of thy people: and a time shall come such as never was from the time that nations began even until that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, every one that shall be found written in the book.” (Daniel 12:1)

We indeed are in the days prophesied by Daniel, the days of the Apocalypse. This truly is the time for the children of God to call upon the great Archangel Michael that they and their country might be saved from the encroaching scourge of Socialism. 

                                         ____________

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls.

Amen.

Socci & Mazza: “Benedict XVI who Relinquished all the Power of Governance [as the Bishop of Rome]… remain[ed]… Pope [the Successor of Peter]”

November 02, 2020

Antonio Socci in his book said “during the days of the polemical statements [by Team Francis] concerning Ratzinger’s preface to the book of Cardinal Sarah Bergoglio [Francis] gave a homily that seemed to be a criticism of the pope emeritus, specifically for his ‘halfway’ resignation.”

Francis said:

“[A] pastor has to… take his leave well, to not leave only halfway.”

Socci questioned:

“To whom is he referring? To Benedict XVI who relinquished all the power of governance while remaining pope?”
(The Secret of Benedict XVI, Pages 123-124)

In Francis criticizing Benedict’s “‘halfway’ resignation” is he implicitly admitting the apparent thesis of Dr. Ed Mazza that “Benedict XVI who relinquished all the power of governance [as the Bishop of Rome]… remain[ed]… pope [the Successor of Peter]” according to Socci?

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

Fred Martinez

Dear Friend – I forgot how young you are! 

Everything I told you is well documented. I should have mentioned that the first President of this new prolife corporation – the NCHLA   was a young homosexual Catholic seminarian by the name of Robert N. Lynch, the future Bishop Lynch who is now banned in two dioceses because of his preying on young men. 

If you cannot recall this matter, it may be because you, as bishop, never contributed to the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment. It’s only source of income is from the American bishops. I’m surprised you were not solicited. 

All the details on this nefarious group are in Part II of the series I am doing for the Catholic Inquisitor on “Bishop James T. McHugh -The Forgotten Man in the McCarrick Equation.”  

Hopefully, when Part II is published maybe in Dec 2020, there will be greater impetus for an investigation of the NCHLA. 

In the meantime All Saints Blessings to you. 

You so remind me of my dear friend Bishop Austin Vaughan, Aux. of New York, one of the few bishops I could always count on. 

St. Peter Damian watch over you, Randy 

 The following Article first appeared in 

The Catholic Inquisitor Summer 2020 

Bishop James T. McHugh – 

The Forgotten Man in the McCarrick Equation  

Part I – Bishop James T. McHugh, Cardinal McCarrick, Clerical Sodomy & Their  Impact on the Prolife Movement  

By Randy Engel[i]

Introduction 

As Catholics await the long-overdue Vatican Final Report on the Cardinal Theodore McCarrick scandal from Rome, there is one significant figure who has managed to escape   public scrutiny – that of Bishop James T. McHugh, one of McCarrick’s earliest sexual protégés and the primary architect of AmChurch’s disastrous “prolife” policies and strategies for more than 30 years.  

This omission needs to be rectified now, before the McCarrick Report is released by the Holy See, for a number of reasons.

First, because the blood of hundreds of thousands of unborn children in our nation who have been murdered in their mother’s womb or destroyed in the spic and span hell of IVF clinics or killed by abortifacient devices or chemicals DEMANDS a historical accounting of the role played by homosexual prelates in the furtherance of legalized abortion. 

Second, because most of our early prolife heroes like Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice, Father Paul Marx founder of Human Life International, March for Life founder Nellie Gray, Child and Family editor Dr. Herbert Ratner, U.S. Coalition for Life UN/NGO representative Marge Garvey, and Long Island Coalition for Life grassroot leaders John Mawn and John Short, and countless other great Catholic souls, have long since gone to their  reward. There are not many of us left to tell the story of  how the hidden hand of clerical sodomy in AmChurch operated as a trojan horse for many years in the nascent prolife camp. And how, with the cooperation of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/U.S. Catholic Conference, this homosexual clique continued to grab defeat after defeat from the jaws of almost certain prolife victories in these early years. 

Third, because it is more than likely that when the McCarrick Report is made public, there not will be any reference to the anti-life role that McCarrick and McHugh, and other homosexual members of the American hierarchy played in the blindsiding and undermining of the  early Prolife Movement.  

 Obviously, it would be grossly inaccurate and unfair  to suggest that McHugh, and his primary protector, McCarrick, were the first generation of American Catholic homosexual prelates to be involved in politics and strategies harmful to Catholic morals, politics, and strategies. That dubious honor would most likely go to the late Francis Cardinal Spellman of New York and to Spellman’s successor Terence Cardinal Cooke, former personal secretary to Spellman, and the Chairman of the Catholic Bishops’ Committee for Pro-Life Activities for ten years.[ii]   

McCarrick, who had served as homosexual Cardinal Cooke’s private secretary was a third generation homosexual in the Spellman line, which made McHugh a fourth generation homosexual bishop. So, while McHugh alone  could not be blamed for the long litany of losses suffered by the emerging Prolife Movement prior to and immediately after Roe vs Wade on January 22, 1973, his role was nevertheless pivotal, and in the end, definitive.  

McHugh Chronicles[iii] Documents McHugh’s Anti-Life Record

This writer is certain that not every Catholic layman or cleric or bishop will appreciate my public airing of this tragic saga of the hierarchial enemies of Life within AmChurch. 

I say certain because when my book, The McHugh Chronicles was released in 1997, it met with considerable opposition – not from rank and file prolifers, but from paid “prolife” careerists connected to the NCCB/USCC. 

In fact, opposition to the Chronicles continues even until today, 23 years later, the latest critic being none other than the recently retired Archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles Joseph Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. who called the promotion of the Chronicles “a sin.”[iv] I trust the reader will decide for himself whether the archbishop’s criticism is valid or not.  

The McHugh Chronicles – Who Betrayed the Prolife Movement? charged the USCC’s Family Life Director Msgr. James T. McHugh, with:

• Promoting sex initiation programs, aka sex education, in parochial schools – programs which are anti-child, anti-education, anti-family, anti-civilized and anti-human, and pro-contraception, pro-abortion and pro-homosexual.
• Creating a false and controlled anti-abortion movement in the Church while sabotaging legitimate efforts within the grass-roots Prolife Movement to stop the slaughter of innocent preborn children.
• Undermining the Catholic Church’s magisterial teachings on contraception, divorce, abortion by curette, chemical or device, non-therapeutic prenatal diagnosis, eugenics, and in vitro fertilization and serving as a damage control agent for the Eugenic Establishment (including the National Foundation/March of Dimes) in the United States and as an agent provocateur for the Population Control Establishment on the international scene.[v]

The only charge against McHugh that I withheld at the time was the charge that he was a closeted homosexual cleric. By 1997, when the Chronicles were published, I was already in my tenth year of research on The Rite of Sodomy. I had a long running list of homosexual prelates on file, including Spellman, Cooke, McCarrick and Bernardin. However, as regards McHugh, although I was aware that McCarrick has gotten him his bishopric, I was not prepared to make the charge of homosexuality against McHugh outside of the context of the extensive NCCB/USCC homosexual network – a charge that I did document nine years later in The Rite of Sodomy.[vi]

Nevertheless, in the Preface to the McHugh Chronicles, I did note the following: 

… Throughout his clerical career, McHugh has demonstrated an uncanny ability not only to survive one pro-life debacle after another, but to move quickly up the ecclesiastical ladder from monsignor and papal chamberlain (1972), to Auxiliary Bishop of Newark (1988), to Bishop of Camden (1989).[vii]

In comparison to some of his contemporaries from the USCC Family Life Office years, including the deceased apostate priest, Father Walter Imbiorski, and the late Father George Hagmaier, C.S.P. who committed suicide, McHugh has continued to lead an extraordinarily charmed life. 

It is common knowledge that since his earliest years at the Bishops’ Secretariat in Washington, DC, McHugh has enjoyed the patronage and protection of a number of high-ranking American prelates including the late Terence Cardinal Cooke, Chairman of the Bishops’ Committee for Pro-Life Activities; Archbishop Theodore E. McCarrick of the Archdiocese of Newark, where McHugh served briefly as an auxiliary bishop; and most importantly, the powerful, and now deceased,  Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Archdiocese of Chicago, who was a key player on the elitist New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, founded in 1921 to advance the cause of a one-world government (dictatorship).[viii]

Pre-Conciliar Bishops Supported Traditional Catholic Morality

It is difficult, I think, for many faithful Catholics today to understand how far our post-Conciliar bishops (with rare exceptions) had fallen in terms of candor, courage and moral fortitude by the time the NCCB/USCC bureaucracy was formed in 1965-1966 under the dual-leadership of Cardinal John  Dearden of Detroit  and the young  homosexual Bishop Joseph Bernardin. 

One measure would be to compare the statements on Catholic morality made by AmChurch’s predecessors including the National Catholic Welfare Council, with the formal statements and collective positions made by the NCCB/USCC following the Second Vatican Council.   

Here are a selection of formal pastoral letters and statements made in the name of the American hierarchy on key moral issues dating back to 1829: 

Yes! the characteristics of the child, as St. John Chrysostom well observes, are the characteristic of the saint…God has made you the guardians of those children to lead them to His service on earth, that they might become saints in Heaven. “What will it avail them to gain the whole world if they lose their souls?”… Woe to him that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were tied around his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea? 

[Pastoral Letter to the Laity, 17 October 1829] 

We deplore the enormous scandal of some who, having already contracted marriage, enter into new engagements during the lifetime of their lawful consorts. 

[On Divorce, Pastoral Letter, 1843] 

… The selfishness which leads to race suicide with or without the Pretext of bettering

the species, is, in God’s sight, “a detestable  thing.” It is the crime of individuals  for which, eventually, the nation  must suffer. The harm which it does cannot be repaired by social 

service, nor offset by pretending economic or domestic advantage. On the contrary, there is joy in the hope of offspring, for “the inheritance of the Lord are children; and His reward, the fruit of the womb.” The bond of love is strengthened, fresh stimulus is given to thrift and industrious effort, and the very sacrifices which are called for become sources of blessing.

[On Onanism, Birth Control and Eugenics,

Pastoral Letter, 26 September 1919][ix]

The destruction or serious impairment of home life has brought about a selfish, and inhuman propaganda of birth prevention…. May our Catholic families courageously and with firm trust in God reject the modern paganism, and seek the priceless riches of large, happy, and blessed families!  

[Undermining the Home: Pastoral Letter, 25 April 1933] 

We voice a grave warning against the propaganda of so-called planned parenthood, which violates the moral law, robs the family of its nobility and high social purpose, and weakens the physical and moral fiber of the nation.

[Neopagan Views of Marriage, 11 November 1943]

Fathers and mothers have a natural competence to instruct their children with regard to sex. False modesty should not deter them from doing their duty in this regard….We protest in the strongest possible terms against the introduction of sex instruction into the schools to be of benefit. Such instruction must be far broader than the imparting of information, and must be given individually. ….It [sex] can be fully and properly appreciated only within a religious and moral context. If treated otherwise, the child will see it apart from the controlling purpose of his life, which is service to God.  

The Child: Citizen of Two Worlds,  

17 November 1950 

United States Catholics believe that the promotion of artificial birth prevention is a morally, humanly, psychologically, and politically disastrous approach to the population problem. …They will not, however, support any  public assistance, either at home or abroad, to promote artificial birth prevention, abortion, or sterilization whether through direct aid or by means of international organizations. 

[Explosion or Backfire? 19 November 1959] 

The above quotations cover a span of over 130 years. Thy clearly reflect the high degree of concern  that our Catholic bishops collectively expressed for the burning moral issues of the day. This concern was directed not only toward Catholic families, most especially the children entrusted to their care, but also toward the Common Good (the bonun commune).

All in all, from the time of the First Provincial Council of Baltimore in 1829, the American bishops performed exceedingly well in their public defense of Catholic marriage and family life. Immigrant Catholic families, sheltered in their ethnic ghettos, initially were able to resist the worst excesses of American secularism under the protection of their Ordinary and their pastors, together with the support of their ethnic parishes and various Catholic services and charities. 

Cracks in the Dam at the NCWC

By the mid-1960s, however, serious moral cracks were developing in the structure of the American bishops’ bureaucracy at the National Catholic Welfare Conference (NCWC) in Washington, D.C. 

For example, the NCWC’s Family Life Bureau invited Planned Parenthood-World Population, to be in attendance at its official functions.  The  scuttlebutt was that Family Life officials were interested in obtaining federally-financed birth control research grants from the National Institute of Health that would lead to an improvement of the “rhythm” method. 

In anticipation of a reversal of the Roman Catholic Church’s magisterial teaching on the intrinsic evil of contraception,  influential members of the American hierarchy, including Cardinals Francis Spellman of New York, Richard Cushing of Boston, John Cushing of Chicago, John Dearden of Detroit and John Krol of Philadelphia made their own private “arrangements” to accommodate state-sponsored birth control programs. These back-door affairs often followed a well- staged and heavily publicized show of opposition to government population control programs for the “benefit” of Catholics in the pews. 

As a group, these five American bishops were heavily influenced in their views on the issue of birth prevention as public policy by John Courtney Murray, S.J., principle architect of Church-State affairs for the NCWC, Cardinal Spellman’s personal peritus at the Second Vatican Council, and Cardinal Cushing’s chief advisor on contraception and “religious freedom.”   

Father Murray had little stomach for anything resembling the Comstock Law which he viciously attacked. Such laws, Murray insisted, made “a public crime out of a private sin,” confused “morality with legality,” and were “unenforceable without a police invasion of the bedroom.”[x]Tragically, it would be his  mythical “police-state” theory on the alleged dangers of anti-birth control legislation (that kept PP-WP from opening up birth control clinics), that would lead to the equally mythical “constitutional right to privacy”’ in the Supreme Court birth control case Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) and later in Roe v. Wade (1973).[xi]

In favor of the public promotion and sale of contraceptives, Murray also leaned toward legalizing abortion.[xii] “In a June 21, 1967, letter written to answer a question posed by a Mrs. James Moran as to “what a baby is,” Murray wrote the following incredible response: “The question that you ask – what is a baby – is certainly a valid one. But  am not one to judge what the answer should be.”[xiii] This from a priest advising the American bishops on questions of Catholic doctrine and morals.!

“Catholic” Universities Join the Malthusian Parade

Additional pressure on the American hierarchy to accept massive government subsidized  birth prevention programs was applied by several Church-related institutions of higher learning including the University of Notre Dame, Catholic University of America, and Georgetown University. These Catholic universities had received large financial  grants and gifts from the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations. Entrance into the foundation interlock guaranteed them power, money, and secular status.[xiv]

NCCB Surrenders to Federal Birth Control Programs 

On November 14, 1966, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a corporate statement titled “On the Government and Birth Control,” [xv] in which the drafters  of the document defended certain freedoms of families, and called upon government to foster good social and economic conditions for family life. They then warned against the dangers of government birth control programs  in connection with threats to rights to privacy, to personal and familial freedom, and they called for “a clear and unqualified separation of welfare assistance from birth control considerations.” They noted that, “government activities increasingly seek to persuade and even coerce the underprivileged to practice birth control.” They also reminded government officials that “birth control is not a universal obligation.” In the end they called for vigorous popular action, especially by Catholics, to oppose birth control programs at every level of government. [xvi]

In 1968, Constitutional lawyer William Bentley Ball, a long-time Catholic prolifer,  explained what happened  after the NCCB/USCC issued its statement … which was in fact, NOTHING:

This statement [dangers of government birth control] was an argument, complete in itself, but by virtue of its assertions it plainly opened the door to a national debate. This debate was never forthcoming. The statement was at once taken under fire, with volleys of questions and accusations being directed to the bishops following November 14. The public – and specially the Catholic public – having been called to “oppose vigorously and by every democratic means,” state and federal promotion of birth control – WERE LEFT WITH NOTHING BUT THE DYING ECHO OF THE TRUMPET CALL. Far from being provided with any sort of detailed information on the issues by the statement’s authors who had raised them, or guidelines to the action sought, THE CATHOLIC LAITY OF THE UNITED STATES NEVER HEARD A WORD  ABOUT THE WHOLE SUBJECT (emphasis added). 

This surprising refusal or neglect to make the bishops’ case before the American public was unfortunate in two ways: while default in the defense of the statement went far to permit discrediting of what the bishops  had said on the government birth control issue, it also unnecessarily  created the impression that having “laid down the law” and hurled a threat in the teeth of public administrators who were programming birth control, nothing more need be said. Eloquent though the statement had been, a case of ipse dixit would attach to it unless an effort were carried out in forums of opinion and broadly  in the community to attempt  to persuade the public of the reasonableness of the statement’s assertions. Such an attempt would not have added fuel to the flames: good argument usually reduces anger and dilutes bitterness. It is the fiat – unexplained and unknown in terms of what political threats it may conceal – that triggers the fears which trigger wrath.

It should have been realized that some explanatory follow-through was peculiarly demanded in this situation , since birth control, as a private practice, is most popular, and since the new governmental activities promoting birth control growingly enjoy a presumption of beneficence in the United States. …

It can at any rate  now [1968] be concluded that the default of the Catholic Church (or of Church staff officials whose duty it was to carry forward policy [USCC]) on the subject of government birth control programming may prove to have been of historic moment BECAUSE THE CATHOLC CHURCH ALONE, AMONG ALL THE BODIES IN THE AMERICAN SOCIETY, PROABLY POSSESSED THE MEANS TO BRING GOVERNMENT BIRTH CONTROL INTO PUBLIC QUESTION AND TO CAUSE ITS PROPONENTS TO ATTEMPT TO MAKE THEIR CASE FOR IT (bold added). Without regard to the issue of whether the programs in question are for ill or good, the result of such inquiry and such shifting of the burden of proof, so to speak, might have been a rejection of the program by the public, or a careful circumscription  thereof. As matters stand now, it will be seen that what began as a plea by pro-government-birth control forces simply to “make available” (through government help) birth control services “to those who need them but can’t afford to pay for them” may result in something far different  and little dreamt of social consequences.[xvii]

Among those “little dreamt social consequences” resulting from the inaction of the American bishops (NCCB) and its lobbying arm, the U.S. Catholic Conference, to publicly lead the Catholic battle against federal and state birth control programs were:

• The promulgation of the U.S. Government’s first multi-billion dollar Five-Year Plan for Population Control and Family Planning and the opening of the Federal Office of Population Affairs under the direction of abortionist Dr. Louis Hellman, friend and confident of Alan Guttmacher of Planned Barrenhood fame. It was Hellman who promoted the “Stop the Stork” campaign out of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare – a program that included mass sterilization of indigent women.
• The funding of National Institute of Health “contraceptive research” program promoted by R.T. Ravenholt, head of the Population Control Office of the Agency for International Development (USAID). Ravenholt, who celebrated Our Lord’s birth by hanging abortifacient IUDs on his office Christmas tree and celebrated the Fourth of July by ordering the producing of red, white and blue condoms for foreign distribution, was intent on developing a once-a-month pill that would insure the non-pregnant state of a woman at the end of every cycle.  
• The establishment of teen birth control and  abortion referral services like Teen Scene of Chicago where youngsters as young as twelves could obtain contraceptive devices and pills without their parents’ knowledge or consent. 
• And finally, by their inaction, the American bishops and their bureaucrats ushered in Roe vs Wade, the Supreme Court decision which opened the door to surgical abortion at all stages pregnancy up until birth, and which under the guise of “contraception” permitted the wide-spread distribution of abortifacient devices and pills whose death toll would be incalculable over the next half-century.  

So it was, that within seven years of their “Statement on the Government and Birth Control,” all formal organized opposition by the American bishops and their bureaucracy  to Federal domestic and foreign birth control/population control programs had collapsed – the Abortion Establishment had come to the fore to make the case for child murder for “faulty or omitted contraception,” – and the Prolife Grassroots Movement was born. 

Early Prolife Movement Suffer From Unknown Obstacles 

There are two important historical footnotes to be added to this aforementioned tragic scenario before zeroing in on the role played by Bishop McHugh in the undermining of the early Prolife Movement. 

First, the Catholic reader needs to understand that the decision of the American hierarchy to abandon its long-held policy in opposition to state and federal “birth control” promotion and services, and instead switch to the fallback position of surgical abortion,  had already been made before that fateful day of  November 14, 1966, when the NCCB/USCC publicly waved the white flag of surrender before the Anti-Life Establishment.  

Archbishop Cody’s Secret Deal With Joe Beasley  

 This story begins in the fall of 1965 with a charismatic birth control crusader named Dr. Joseph D. Beasley of Tulane University, who dreamed of leading a national battle against the proliferation of people. He wanted to begin with a modest population control program for black welfare recipients in the northern counties of Louisiana. He was stymied, however, by state laws prohibiting the distribution of contraceptive information. More importantly, he had to contend with the powerful Catholic Church in Louisiana and the explosive charge of “black genocide” before he could get any population control project off the ground.    

Within a matter of weeks, the ever-charming and resourceful Beasley had engineered a satisfactory agreement with the New Orleans Family Life officials, following the consultation of the New Orleans Archdiocese with Archbishop John Cody of Chicago.

In his fascinating book, The Politics of Population Control, writer Thomas Littlewood describes one of Beasley’s incredible sessions with a Church representative handpicked by Cardinal Cody:   

The place is the Petroleum Club in Shreveport, Louisiana. Over a sumptuous dinner of the finest chateaubriand, Joseph Diehl Beasley … is engaged comfortably in conversation with Msgr. Marvin Bordelon[xviii] representing the bishops of the Catholic dioceses of Louisiana. (They) are discussing the new Politics of Population. To be more precise, they are negotiating the conditions under which the Church would permit Beasley to begin providing tax-financed birth control services to low-income residents of the state.[xix]    

The “Bordelon Accord” bore a striking resemblance to the birth control concordat signed by the Puerto Rican bishops three years earlier.[xx] It is important to realize that Joe Beasley was not after the monsignor’s or the Catholic Church’s blessings, just a promise of “non-interference.”[xxi]

In order to attract black support for his program and to stave off charges of “genocide,” Joe Beasley used a set of different tactics against community and state black leaders, namely, patronage and payola!  He also siphoned off large sums of federal family planning funds to out-of-state militant civil rights groups.[xxii]

After Archbishop Cody personally assured an incredulous Governor John McKeithen (not a Catholic) that Beasley had his (Cody’s) permission to begin his birth control program, state regulations were “reinterpreted” to permit Beasley to begin his welfare reduction program for poor black families, a program which was almost entirely dependent on abortifacients including IUDs and “The Pill.”[xxiii]

     In less than ten years, Beasley had pyramided his Family Health Foundation (FHF) into a $62 million empire with over one hundred federally funded birth control clinics statewide.[xxiv] Beasley’s FHF received accolades from every imaginable quarter as “the No.1 success story” of the birth control movement, including that of the NCCB/USCC Family Life Director, Fr. James McHugh! 

     “I have read of Dr. Beasley’s work and I am very impressed by it,” Father McHugh said, “(but) there are other people with ideals that fall far short of those of Dr. Beasley’s project.” This statement in support of Beasley’s birth control program, which, as I have already indicated, was primarily based on abortifacient devices and pills, was made by McHugh at the 1970 Congressional hearing on the now infamous Family Planning Services and Population Research Act.[xxv]

      By 1973, however, it was clear that, once again, McHugh had placed his bet on yet another “dark horse,” morally speaking. That year, a General Accounting Office audit, and a lengthy federal government investigation of the FHF confirmed Beasley’s alarming record of political corruption. Soon after, in the spring of 1974, “federal marshals surrounded the FHF headquarters in New Orleans and the foundation was placed in federal receivership.”[xxvi]  

     The Federal Government’s charges against Beasley, the FHF’s founder, included multiple counts of conspiracy to commit fraud, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and mail fraud, together with misappropriation of many thousands of dollars of federal “family planning” funds for illegal payments for liquor bills, private plane junkets, and political campaign contributions. Eugene Wallace, an FHF official who turned state’s evidence, testified during one court hearing that Beasley had threatened to kill him with a shotgun if he (Wallace) took the stand against him![xxvii] Interestingly, while the Anti-Life Establishment deserted Beasley like rats fleeing a sinking ship, volunteer lawyers from “Catholic” Loyola’s New Orleans University Law School handled his appeal!!![xxviii]

      As for the rest of the American bishops, all of whom had now been dragged into the Beasley quagmire by Archbishop Cody and the Louisiana hierarchy, they were in for a double whammy when Beasley joined J. D. Rockefeller III (Chairman of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future) at a press conference in 1972 calling for universal, tax-subsidized abortion. Beasley later acknowledged that his deal with Church officials was part of his threefold strategy of getting family planning in first, and then following up with sterilization and abortion![xxix]

     Such an admission, one would suppose, should have given the American bishops cause for grave concern since they had permitted the federal government’s multi-billion dollar five year  Family Planning Services and Population Research Act to be signed into law two years earlier without any real opposition on their part. 

It should also have led them to question the judgment of Family Life Director, Father James McHugh,  but it did not. That omission concerning McHugh, one of many made during the early years of the Prolife Movement, would continue to spell out disaster for the movement over the next three decades. 

Obstruction by NCCB/USCC Clerical Homosexuals            

Which brings us to the second major unknown obstacle facing the emerging Prolife Movement in the early 1970s  –  the growing numbers of homosexual clergy and hierarchy at the NCCB/USCC and the role they played in opposing or nullifying prolife federal legislation. Volumes III and IV of The Rite of Sodomy, provides the names of prominent homosexual clerics who dominated AmChurch’s bureaucracy during this critical period for the Prolife Movement with a chapter devoted to the then USCC General Secretary Joseph Bernardin, but for the purposes of this article, we’ll be looking at just one – homosexual Bishop James T. McHugh –  the major architect  of the Church’s policies and programs on prolife issues which continue to haunt  and cripple the Prolife Movement to this very day.  

The Early Career of Jimmy McHugh[xxx]

When the great epic history of the pro-life movement is finally written, the name of Bishop James T. McHugh will undoubtedly appear over and over again at the most important decision points in our movement’s struggle to restore legal protection to the unborn child. His vast knowledge of public policy issues and solid understanding of the political process provided pro-life leaders with invaluable guidance in forming strategies and building organizations capable of confronting the challenge of those who were promoting a culture of death.[xxxi]

                                                                                                                                          Memorial by Ernest L. Ohlhoff                                                                 National Committee for a Human Life Amendment

Father James T. McHugh was ordained as a careerist priest for the Modernist Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey on May 25, 1957,  at the age of twenty-five. A creature of the Second Vatican Council and a devotee of Americanist John Courtney Murray, S.J.,[xxxii] and priest-dissenter , Father Charles Curran of Catholic University,  McHugh joined the staff of the Family Life Bureau (FLB) of NCWC in 1965, and  in 1967 became homosexual Bishop Bernardin’s choice for Director of the new NCCB/USCC’s Family Life Bureau (Office).              

 McHugh Forms Anti-Life Axis at FLB[xxxiii]

Among the earliest projects set in motion at McHugh’s Family Life Office at the NCCB/USCC office in Washington, D.C. was the introduction of “sexual catechetics”[xxxiv] (which replaced sound doctrinal catechetics) into parochial  elementary and secondary schools and Confraternity of Christian Doctrine classes for public school children across the United States.[xxxv]

The American bishops’ 1950 statement opposing classroom sex initiation programs – which was in line with Pope Pius XI’s encyclical on Christian Education of Youth[xxxvi], and the Holy Office’s subsequent affirmation of the papal ban of so-called “sex initiation” programs – was ignored. On November 15, 1968, all opposition from Catholic parents was swept aside, as the American bishops issued their Pastoral Letter Human Life in Our Day, which made “systematic” classroom sex instruction “a gave obligation.”[xxxvii]

This was the first prolife battle that was lost to the post-Conciliar and pro-homosexual forces that dominated the bishops’ episcopal conference. 

It would not be the last.

Prolifers Lose the Human Embryo Battle

An obvious case of the USCC tail wagging the NCCB dog occurred on July 10, 1969, when McHugh defended certain experimental human reproductive procedures including in vitro fertilization that are prohibited by the Catholic Church in his nationally syndicated diocesan column, The Ties That Bind.

In a brilliant piece of “newspeak,” McHugh comments favorably on a June 13,1969, Life magazine article, “Challenge to the Miracle of Life,” by Life science editor Albert Rosenfeld:

According to the Life article, scientists are now seriously experimenting with new ways to initiate the reproductive process that would not require the act of conjugal love between husband and wife. There is the possibility of implanting the male sperm within the woman medically, and there is the possibility of removing an already fertilized ovum[xxxviii]from one woman and implanting it in another, a process that has so far only been tested in animals (bold added). … Many scientists are convinced that we will also discover how to join sperm and ovum outside the woman’s body, thereby initiating the life process in a test tube. Then there is the possibility wherein the female egg, without fertilization by the male sperm, doubles its supply of chromosomes, thereby fertilizing itself. Since this is not uncommon in lower forms of life, scientists conjecture that we will discover the key to initiating the chromosome duplication, perhaps by use of electric shock, some special X-ray process, or the laser beam.[xxxix]

It’s still a matter of guesswork as to how successful scientists will be, but if only a few of their theories work out, we will have more control of the life process than we are presently prepared to accept.[xl]

The important point to grasp at the onset is that such speculations are not an  insult to God nor a denial of His creative plan. There is no reason why God’s power to summon man into existence must be limited to the reproductive process as we know it now. Indeed, there is no reason to presume that the Divine plan does not go far beyond our present scientific speculation and encompass evolutionary breakthroughs that are even beyond our imagination.[xli]

Needless to say, the Prolife Movement did not win the battle against in vitro fertilization. Nor did it win the accompanying battle against human embryo experimentation. “Qui tacet consentit” – “^{Silence gives consent.” And the American bishops remained silent, and let McHugh do the talking for them.}

McHugh – The Trojan Horse in the Prolife Camp

By the time McHugh and his boss, the young Joe Bernardin, took office, the” Abortion Reform Movement” was already well underway. This Anti-life Establishment was part and parcel of the broader “Sexual Reform Movement”[xlii] of the 1920s and 30s,  that promoted masturbation, fornication, adultery, divorce, birth prevention, abortion, sterilization, homosexuality, “sex education,” artificial insemination, pornography, eugenics and euthanasia. 

The nationwide efforts to legalize the murder of unborn children was backed by the powerful Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, which in turn, financed numerous abortion lobbies and organizations including Planned Parenthood-World Population.

Abortion was deemed as a necessary adjunct to failed or omitted contraception as PP-WP spokesman Dr. George Langmyhr admitted in 1971:   

It goes without saying that Planned Parenthood Affiliates have long been involved in programs of abortion information, counseling, and referral. Before the recent changes in abortion laws, these activities were, necessarily unpublicized… Abortion must be “an integral part of any complete or total family planning program,” because “the dilemma of a woman who has a legitimate method failure, or any type of unwanted pregnancy, cannot be avoided by Planned Parenthood clinic personnel.”[xliii]

Too bad the American bishops weren’t listening to Langmyhr when they decided to acquiesce on federal “family planning” programs, while moving the prolife defense line backwards to surgical abortion. 

McHugh Establishes National Right to Life Office

The American bishops responded to the Anti-Life Establishment by creating an anti-abortion organization within the  existing FLB. The new NCCB/USCC was known as the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), with McHugh serving as Executive Director. He was assisted by two young paid personnel, attorney Martin McKernan and Michael Taylor. In 1979, McKernan became an attorney for the Diocese of Camden. Michael Taylor went on to a paid position on the USCCB’s National Committee for a Human Life Amendment. We’ll meet up with McKernan and Taylor later on in this series. 

Known to be silent on contraception and early abortifacients, and wildly in favor of classroom sex programs, McHugh’s NRLC proved to be a liability to the exploding no-compromise grassroots Prolife Movement and its early legislative and political initiatives at the state and federal levels.

A case in point was the efforts in the fall of 1970 of the Society for the Christian Commonwealth (SCC), a magisterial-minded, no-compromise Catholic lay group, to  organize a national meeting of prolife leaders and organizations in Washington, D.C. to forge a united effort against abortion. All the members of the SCC Steering Committee were  distinguished national prolife figures. They included Law Professor Charles Rice, Family Life advocate, Dr. Herbert Ratner, and Yale Professor James Chu, a vocal critic of classroom sex programs. 

The “National Right to Life Congress,” (with the same acronym, NRLC, of McHugh’s prolife office) was scheduled to convene on April 6-8, 1971 in Washington D.C. at the Sheraton Park Hotel.

But the Congress never happened. 

This critical effort, which could have and would have set up the Prolife Movement to act decisively and effectively on multiple political and legislative fronts in the face of any proabortion action by the Supreme Court, was systematically sabotaged and eventually killed by McHugh with the able and willing connivance of Joe Bernardin at the USCC.[xliv]

McHugh managed to convince the American bishops that the Church could “not get into politics.” Nor could it oppose abortion “from the pulpit” or by passing the collection plate.[xlv]  This argument was asinine as the USCC had been established as a civic corporate arm of the NCCB for the express purpose of influencing national legislation and federal public policies. 

McHugh Advises Against S.C. Challenge

McHugh’s undermining of grassroots prolife efforts continued even after January 22, 1973 when the Supreme Court issued Roe v Wade  (and its twin decision, Roe v. Bolton). 

On January 27, 1973, just five days the Court decision, McHugh convened a closed door meeting of leading  prolife lawyers including Charlie Rice of Notre Dame and a national Advisor to the USCL AT THIS CRITICAL JUNCTURE, MCHUGH ADVISED THE LAWYERS AGAINST CHALLENGING THE SUPREME COURT’S RULINGS.[xlvi] Yes, you read that right.

McHugh, who was representing the USCC Family Life Office and the NCCB Diocesan anti-abortion agencies across the nation, told the prolife lawyers that a “States Rights” approach was the most promising avenue to “restrict” the (unrestictable) Court’s  decision which legalized the killing of unborn children up to the time of birth in every State. 

McHugh’s position came as no surprise. In 1972, McHugh’s NRLC sent letters to all State Right to Life groups urging them NOT TO SUPPORTH.J.R.1186, sponsored by Congressman John Schmitz of California, which called for a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the right to life of the unborn child.

McHugh’s States’ rights proposal was rejected by the lawyers’ group who noted that the January 22^nd ruling DID NOT LEAVE A SHRED OF ENFORCEABLE LAW ON WHICH TO ERECT NEW STATE LEGISLATION TO PROTECT EVEN A HANDFUL OF UNBORN CHILDREN.

Instead, the prolife lawyers put together a committee to draft a Constitutional Amendment that would establish the personhood of the unborn child. 

But the damage was  done – the Prolife Movement was fatally divided with grassroots Catholics favoring a Constitutional Human Life Amendment that acknowledged the personhood of the unborn child at every stage of human development, and the  NCCB/USCC favoring a States Rights approach to “regulate” and/or “restrict” the killing of the unborn.

McHugh Advances Up the Clerical Ladder.

When the bishops reorganized and expanded their prolife offices at the NCCB/USCC in the late fall of 1972, McHugh became the Secretary and Executive  of the Ad Hoc Committee for Pro-Life Affairs, that later became a formal Standing Committee of the NCCB called the Bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities. While the  new Pro-Life Secretariat was theoretically under the control of a chair and seven other bishops, in  practice, the routine work and  development of new prolife programs and strategies were handled almost exclusively by McHugh. His power and influence as the bishops’ point man for prolife affairs continued to increase.

In addition, in 1974, the bishops created and financed a new anti-abortion lobbying arm of the called the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment (NCHLA). 

Unfortunately, McHugh’s vision of what constituted a pro-life agenda and plan of action was radically different from that of grassroots prolifers as well as some members of the Catholic Hierarchy. 

Cardinals Oppose States’ Rights Amendment

The nature of this ongoing conflict became abundantly clear at the historic first Congressional hearing for a Constitutional Human Life held in March 1974 before the Constitutional Amendments Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, chaired by Senator Birch Bayh.  

One of four cardinals giving testimony in favor of a Constitutional Human Life  Amendment to protect all unborn children, was Cardinal Humberto Cardinal Medeiros of Boston who forthrightly replied to the  question of “exceptions,”  that the Catholic Conference was opposed in principle to any and all “exceptions,” as “the prohibition against the direct and intentional taking of innocent human life should be universal and without exception.”[xlvii]

Cardinal Medeiros also rejected the principle of a States’ Rights amendment, explaining: “A ‘States’ Rights’ amendment which would simply return jurisdiction over the abortion law to the States, does not seem to be a satisfactory solution to the existing situation. Protection of human life should not depend upon geographical boundaries.”[xlviii]   

However, one year late, on July 8, 1975, at the last session of the Bayh Human Life Amendment hearings, Medeiros’s opposition to “exceptions,” and a “States’ Rights strategy was undermined by testimony given by  Professor David W. Louisell, a law professor at the University of California, who introduced the Noonan States’ Rights Amendment. Louisell’s appearance had been arranged by the NCHLA, in cooperation with McHugh and his Bishops’ Committee for Pro-Life Affairs.   

The NCHLA then approached Senator Quentin N. Burdick of North Dakota, known to be in favor of numerous “exceptions,” and persuaded him to introduce the Noonan Amendment at the upcoming closed session of Bayh’s Subcommittee meeting on September 17, 1975. A vote on each of the pending amendments including the Hogan-Helms Human Life Amendment supported by prolife grassroots activists,  was expected at that time. A letter endorsing the Noonan Amendment was released by the Bishops’ Committee for Pro-Life Affairs and the NCHLA, claiming the States’ Rights amendment was a “carefully drawn compromise proposal.” 

In reality, the Noonan Amendment was not a Human Life Amendment at all. It merely gave a State the right,  not the obligation, to protect “life” (and not specifically human life). Further, it failed to:

• Declare the unborn child a person under the Constitution with specific reference to the 5th and 14th Amendments.

·       It failed to state at what point in time the “right to protect life” would be affected.     

·       And it failed to empower Congress to pass legislation to cut off pro-abortion domestic or foreign funding since the term “federal jurisdictions” used in this amendment applied to geographical locations such as the District of Columbia or U.S. military bases only.[xlix]

On the final balloting, all the Constitutional Amendments failed to be voted out of Bayh’s subcommittee. Even the “compromise” Noonan Amendment was defeated by a 4-4 tie vote. For the record, McHugh’s “man of the hour,” Senator Burdick, did not cast a vote for any Human Life Amendment!      

The real kicker, however, was that no dyed-in-the-wool Catholic grassroots prolife group would support such a deadly “compromise,” but diocesan-funded anti-abortion leaders   acting under orders from McHugh, would probably acquiesce – thus fracturing the Prolife Movement even more.  

And the bloody war against baby killing dragged on into the 21^st century.

Time Lost Can Never Be Regained

There’s a saying that, “History repeats itself,” which is true enough from a macro-point of view. But history never repeat itself exactly the same at the micro-level.  The characters and the timing, circumstances, etc. are always different. 

The early Prolife Movement, composed primarily of Catholic lay men and women (unpaid) with the support of local pastors, had its best and perhaps only shot at stopping legalized abortion (including abortifacient drugs and devices) BEFORE Griswold vs Conn. and Roe vs Wade. Tragically, it’s a shot that likely will not pass our way again, barring Divine intervention, thanks to the American bishops who placed their trust in men like McHugh and Bernardin.   

Long after the SCC debacle was just a fading heartbreaking memory, the betrayals of the Prolife Movement by McHugh continued unabated.  With rare exceptions like Cardinal Patrick O’Boyle of Washington, D.C.,  and New York Auxiliary Bishop Austin Vaughn, no American bishop sought to dethrone McHugh as their official spokesman on  family and prolife issues.  

Prolifers Lose Battle Against March of Dimes 

Man is not an animal by nature;

                                       the table not a feeding trough,       

and the home not a biological experimental station. 

                  Fr. Thomas J. Gerard, 1912[l]

Fr. Gerrard dubbed radical eugenics doctrine as “a complete return to the life of the beast,” which described the beliefs of Catholic bishops and clergy on the creed of eugenics at the turn of the 20^th century in America.   

A half a century later, McHugh was able to turn that opinion on its head. 

The most intense battle against eugenics, specifically eugenic abortion, – the cold, calculated slaughter of unborn children suspected of carrying a genetic disorder or physical or mental handicap – took place within the context of an epic-making 30- year long prolife battle against the National Foundation/March of Dimes (MOD).  

Using his usual modus operandi of stealth, deception, duplicity and secret memos to the American bishops, McHugh, an Advisory Board member and willing and enthusiastic champion of the MOD, defended the well-documented anti-life activities of the eugenic-based organization which included the promotion, research  and funding of non-therapeutic amniocentesis and fetoscopy, lethal live human fetal experimentation, the development of abortifacient devices, classroom sex instruction, lobbying for expanded, federally-funded eugenics research and services, etc., etc., etc.[li]

Not even when the U.S. Coalition for Life headed by this writer exposed a MOD research grant of $9,240 grant to Peter A. J. Adam of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland to study fetal brain fuel metabolism at the University of Helsinki, Finland – research that involved the severing and perfusion of heads of live aborted babies, ages 3 to 5 months gestation delivered by hysterotomy – did a single American bishop repudiate McHugh’s backing of the MOD.[lii]

In the fall of 1973, when the MOD was on the ropes, and a national prolife boycott loomed on the horizon, the MOD called upon its secret weapon – James McHugh, now raised to the rank of Monsignor and a Papal Chamberlain by Paul VI   – to bail the MOD out of its self-inflicted anti-life quagmire.

On November 7, 1973, Msgr. McHugh released the first of several reports in defense of the MOD titled. “National Foundation-March of Dimes and Abortion.” McHugh stated that he had met with MOD officials their future grant proposals would not directly encourage abortion.[liii] The report along with a pro-MOD information packet was distributed by the Family Life Office to the American bishops and parochial school and Catholic organization around the nation. For its part, the MOD’s National Office in White Plains, NY, used it as a battering ram against prolife groups especially the USCL that had  which led the decades old fight against the MOD. 

Two years later, on March 11, 1975, McHugh using the new NCCB Committee for Population and Pro-Life Activities issued his second major pro-MOD memorandum marked CONFIDENTIAL to the American bishops in which he reiterated his earlier contention that some prolife groups had “misunderstood” the MOD’s (eugenic) philosophy and activity. [liv]…

[Message clipped]  View entire message

ReplyForward

https://2ndschism.com/video-96-miles-of-trump-cars-line-up-along-a-highway-in-arizona-in-epic-silent-majority-show-of-force/

From Archbishop ViganoExcellent article. Long.But definitely worth reading.Explains some of Bergoglio’s andhis henchmen’s plans for the NewWorld Catholic Church they are planning.That is the, anti-church, the false catholicchurch. Before the article here are some other information from the Alta Vendita.And messages from Our Lady to Father Gobbi.Both fit into what Archbishop Vigano’s article is about. The Alta Vendita is the Masonic blueprint for the subversion of the Catholic Church.“Our ultimate end is that of Voltaire and of the French Revolution-the final destructionof Catholicism, and even of the Christian idea.”From the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita.The strategy advanced in The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita is astonishing in its audacity and cunning. From the start, the document tells of a process that will takedecades to accomplish. Those who drew up the document knew that they would not seeits fulfillment. They were inaugurating a work that would be carried on by succeeding generations of the initiated. The Permanent Instruction says, “In our ranks the soldier diesand the stuggle goes on.”     The Instruction called for the dissemination of liberal ideas and axioms throughout society and within the institutions of the Catholic Church so that laity, seminarians, clericsand prelates would, over the years, gradually be imbued with progressive principles. In time, this mind-set would be so pervasive that priests would be ordained, bishops wouldbe consecrated and cardinals would be nominated whose thinking was in step with the modern thought rooted in the French Revolution’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and other “Principles of 1789” (equality of religions, separation of Church and State, religiouspluralism, etc.)      Eventually, a Pope would be elected from these ranks who would lead the Church on the path of “enlightenment” and “renewal.” They stated that it was not their aim to place aFreemason on the Chair of Peter. Their goal was to effect an environment that would eventually produce a Pope and a hierarchy won over to the ideas of liberal Catholicism, all the while believing themselves to be faithful Catholics.      These Catholic leaders, then, would no longer oppose the modern ideas of the Revolution(as had been the practice of the Popes from 1789 to 1958—the death of Pope Pius XII—who condemned these liberal principles) but would amalgamate them into the Church. Theend result would be a Catholic clergy and laity marching under the banner of the Enlightenmentall the while thinking they are marching under the banner of the Apostolic keys.      For those who may believe this scheme to be too far-fetched—a goal too hopeless forthe enemy to attain, it should be noted that both Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII asked thatthe Permanent Instruction to be published, no doubt in order to prevent such a tragedy fromtaking place. However, if such a dark state of affairs would ever come to pass, there wouldbe three unmistakable means of recognizing it:1) It would produce an upheaval of such magnitude that the entire world would realize that     there had been a major revolution inside the Catholic Church in line with modern ideas.     It would be clear to all that an “updating” had taken place.2) A new theology would be introduced that would be in contradiction to previous teachings.3) the Freemasons themselves would voice their cock-a-doodle of triumph, believing that the     Catholic Church had finally “seen the light” on such points as equality of religions, the      secular state, pluralism and whatever the compromises had been achieved.Our ultimate end is that of Voltaire and of the French Revolution—the final destruction of Catholicism, and even of the Christian idea…     The Pope, whoever he is, will never come to the secret societies; it is up to the secret societies to take the first step toward the Church, with the aim of conquering both of them.The task that we are going to undertake is not the work of a day, or of a month, or a year; itmay last several years, perhaps a century; but in our ranks the soldier dies and the strugglegoes on.      We do not intend to win the Popes over to our cause, to make them neophytes of ourprinciples, propagators of our ideas. That would be a ridiculous dream; and if events turn out in some way, if cardinals or prelates, for example, of their own free will or by surprise, should enter into a part of our secrets, this is not at all an incentive of desiring their elevationto the See of Peter. The would ruin us. Ambition alone would have led them to apostasy, therequirements of power would force them to sacrifice us. What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs…     With that we shall march more securely towards the assault on the Church than with thepamphlets of our brethren in France and even the gold of England. Do you want to know the reason for this? It is that with this, in order to shatter the high rock on which God has built HisChurch, we no longer need Hannibalian vinegar, or need gunpowder, or even need our arms.We have the little finger of the successor of Peter engaged in the ploy, and little finger is as good, for this crusade, as all the Urban II’s and all the Saint Bernards in Christendom.     Now then, to assure ourselves a Pope of the required dimensions, it is a question first of shaping for this Pope a generation worthy of the reign we are dreaming of. Leave old peopleand those of mature age aside; go to the youth, and if it is possible, even to the children.…You will contrive for yourselves, at little cost, a reputation as good Catholics and pure patriots. This reputation will put access to our doctrines into the midst of the young clergy, aswell as deeply into the monasteries. In a few years, by the force of things, this young clergywill form the sovereign’s council, they will be necessarily more or less imbued with the (revolutionary) Italian and humanitarian principles that we are going to begin to put into circulation. It is a small grain of black mustard, that we are entrusting to the ground; but thesunshine of justice will develop it up to the highest power, and you will see one day what arich harvest this small seed will produce.Combine this with the warnings of Malachi Martin.      The “Smoke of Satan” reference  hearkens even more directly to what a close personalfriend (Malachi Martin) of Pope Paul VI observed in interviews and in two books he wrote about a Satanic “Superforce” at work inside the Vatican. Malachi Martin stated that:     “Suddenly it became unarguable that now… the Roman Catholic organization carried a permanent presence of clerics who worshiped Satan and liked it.”     “The facts that brought the Pope (Pope Paul VI) to a new level of suffering were mainly two: The  systematic organizational links-the network, in other words, that had been establishedbetween certain clerical homosexual groups and Satanist covens. And the inordinate powerand influence of the network.”     In his book, “The Keys of Blood: The Struggle of World Dominion”, Martin wrote: “Most frighteningly for John Paul, he had come up against the irremovable presence of a malign Strength in his own Vatican and in certain bishops chanceries. It was what knowledgeablechurchmen called the “Superforce”.     Martin revealed in even greater detail of a Luciferic “Enthronement” ceremony bySatanists in the Vatican in his book “Windswept House.” “Enthronement of the fallen ArchangelLucifer was effected within the Roman Catholic Citadel on June 29, 1063; a fitting date for the historic promise about to be fulfilled. As the principal agents of this ceremonial well knew, Satanist tradition had long predicted the time of the Prince would be ushered in the momentwhan a Pope would take the name of the Apostle Paul (Pope Paul VI).” Message to Father GobbiFrom Our LadyJune 11, 1998     “On the feast of my Immaculate Heart of this Marian Year, consecrated to me, belovedsons, I am calling all of you to enter into the heavenly garden which I have built for you, during these painful and bloody moments of the purification.     The hour of the great apostasy has come. What has been foretold in Holy Scripture, inthe Second Letter of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians, is now on the point of coming to pass.     Satan, my Adversary, with snares and by means of his subtle seduction, has succeededin spreading errors everywhere, under the form of new and more updated interpretations of the Truth, and he has led many to choose with full knowledge—and to live—sin, in the deceiving conviction that this is no longer an evil, and even that it is a value and a good.     The times of the general confusion and of the greatest agitation of spirits had come. Confusion has entered into the souls and the lives of many of my children.     This great apostasy is spreading more and more, even through the interior of the CatholicChurch. Errors are being taught and spread about, while the fundamental truths of the faith,which the authentic Magisterium of the Church has always taught and energetically defendedagainst any heretical deviation whatsoever, are bing denied with impunity.     The episcopates are maintaining a stage silence and are no long reaction. When my Pope (Pope John Paul II) speaks with courage and reaffirms with force the truths of the Catholic faith, he is no longer listened to and is even publicly criticized and derided. Thereis a subtle and diabolical tactic, woven in secrecy by Masonry, which is used today againstthe Holy Father (Pope John Paul II) in order to bring ridicule upon his person and his workand to neutralize his Magisterium.     Those children of mine who, often unknowingly, allow themselves to be carried along bythis wave of error and of evil are victims of the great apostasy.     Many bishops, priests, religious and faithful are victims of the great apostasy.     In these times, in the Catholic Church, there will remain a little remnant who will be faithful to Christ, to the Gospel, and to its entire truth.The little remnant will form a little flock,all guarded in the depths of my Immaculate Heart. This little flock will be made up of those bishops, priests, religious and faithful who will remain strongly united to the Pope (Pope John Paul II), all gathered together in the cenacle of my Immaculate Heart, in an act of unceasing prayer, or continual immolation, of total offering to prepare the painful way for the second and glorious coming of my Son Jesus.     On this feast of mine in this Marian Year, I address to all those who wish to become part of the little flock the motherly invitation to consecrate themselves to my Heart, to livein intimacy of life with me, to become my courageous apostles in these last times, becausethe moment when my immaculate Heart must be glorified before all the Church and beforeall humanity has come.” Message to Father GobbiFrom Our LadyMay 13, 1987     “Today you are calling to mind the seventy years since my first apparition in the poor Cova da Iria in Fatima, where I came from heaven to give you my message of conversionand of salvation. Since that time, the succession of these years has been a continual confirmation of what I had foretold you.   —The refusal to return to God through conversion has brought all humanity along the arid and cold road of hatred, of violence, of sin and of an ever increasingly widespreadimpurity. Wars have continually succeeded, one upon another, and, despite so many efforts you have not succeeded in building peace. On the contrary, today as never before, the world is being more and more threatened with its very won destruction.   —There is an unwillingness to respond to my demand for prayer, which I had made toyou then, especially with eh frequent recitation of the holy rosary, to obtain the conversionof sinners and the salvation of many souls, exposed to the grave danger of being eternallylost.      Thus the night of sin has enveloped the world and evil has spread everywhere like a terrible cancer. There is an unwillingness to recognize sin as an evil; on the contrary it isopenly justified and exalted as a good. People no longer go to confession. The live and die habitually in mortal sin and every day how many souls go to hell, because there is noone to pray and sacrifice for their salvation.   —My request that Russia be consecrated to me, by the Pope (Pope John Paul II) together with all the bishops, has not been accepted and thus she has spread her errorsin every part of the world.     You are living in a humanity which has built a new civilization, atheistic and anti-human.People no longer love one another; they no longer respect the life and the good of theirneighbor; the flames of egoism and hatred are extinguishing those seeds of goodness which are still springing up in the hearts of men. The poor are being abandoned; thelittle ones are being ensnared and nourished with the poisoned food of scandal; the youthare being betrayed and led into precocious experiences of evil; homes are being profaned and destroyed. . .     How great is your desolation! How dense is the darkness which surrounds you! Intowhat an abyss you have fallen!     Satan has succeeded in extending everywhere his reign of darkness and of death and he rules as an assured victor.     But your are now beginning to live through that which which I had foretold to you atFatima for the last yers of this century of yours and which is still guarded under the veilof secrecy. These are my times. After the painful years of Satan’s triumph, the years of the triumph of my Immaculate Heart are now beginning.” Message to Father GobbiFrom Our Lady August 15, 1989     “Today, look to me, your heavenly Mother, in the splendor of my glorified body assumed, with my soul, into the glory of paradise. I am the Woman Clothed with the Sun. I am your heavenly Leader. I am the Queen of all the Saints.     Look to me as a sign of sure hope and of consolation, in these times of the purification,of the apostasy and of the great tribulation. The times of the struggle and the greatestconquest on the part of the Dragon, of the beast which comes up from the earth and of the beast comes up from the sea have come.     These are therefore the times when a civilization without God is being constructed and all humanity is being led to live without Him.     These are the times when Satan and the diabolic forces are making themselves adored by an ever increasing number of men and thus the spread of the satanic cult, of the sectsand of the black masses is becoming vaster.     These are the times when an idol is being built to be put in the place of the true Godand of the true Church, and this idol is a false christ and a false church.     These are the times when all those who will follow this idol will be signed with its markon the forehead and on the hand.      These are the times when the faithful followers of the Lamb will be subjected to marginalization, to persecutions, to prison and to death.     These are therefore the times of your constancy.     Here must appear the constancy of the saints.     Here must appear the constancy of those who belong to the Lord, who put into practicethe commandments of God and who remain faithful to Jesus.     Here must appear the constancy of those who will be persecuted and led to martyrdom, because blessed are they who die in the Lord, who find rest from their labors and the goodthat they have done accompanies them.      Here must appear the constancy of those who do not adore the beast and who will notallow themselves to be signed with his diabolical mark. Those on the other hand who willadore the beast and its statue and will receive its mark on the forehead and on the hand,will drink the wine of the wrath of God, poured out front eh chalice of his terrible chastisement and will be tortured, in the presence of the Lamb and of the holy angels, with fire and sulphur.     Here must appear the constancy of those who bear, written upon their foreheads, the name of the Lamb and the name of his Father, because they have not betrayed their God,there has never been a lie in their speech and they follow the Lamb wherever He goes.     Here must appear the constancy of all my little children, whom I am calling to consecratethemselves to my Immaculate Heart, to live out with me the conclusive moments of the battle and of the fall of Babylon, when the vintage of the earth will be will be harvested, andthe grapes will be cast into the wine press, which represents the great chastisement of God.     For this reason I invite you today to look to me, your heavenly Mother, in the splendor ofmy glorified body, that my light may illumine you, my Immaculate Heart enfold you, and my motherly love support you to be in these times, courageous witnesses of constancy beforethe Church and before all humanity.”          Catholic Identity Conference October 24th, 2020SCAPEGOATING FRANCIS How the Revolution of Vatican II serves the New World OrderArchbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Apostolic Nuncio  “Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead.”Mt 8:22WE LIVE IN EXTRAORDINARY TIMESAs each of us has probably understood, we find ourselves in an historical moment in time; events of the past, which once seemed disconnected, prove now to be unequivocally connected, both in the principles that inspire them and in the goals they seek to achieve. A fair and objective look at the current situation cannot help but grasp the perfect coherence between the evolution of the global political framework and the role that the Catholic Church has assumed in the establishment of the New World Order. To be more precise, one should speak about the role of that apparent majority in the Church, which is actually small in number but extremely powerful, and which, for brevity’s sake, I will summarize as the deep church.Obviously, there are not two Churches, something that would be impossible, blasphemous, and heretical. Nor has the one true Church of Christ today failed in her mission, perverting herself into a sect. The Church of Christ has nothing to do with those who, for the past sixty years, have executed a plan to occupy her. The overlap between the Catholic Hierarchy and the members of the deep church is not a theological fact, but rather a historical reality that defies the usual categories and, as such, must be analyzed.We know that the New World Order project consists in the establishment of tyranny by Freemasonry: a project that dates back to the French Revolution, the Age of Enlightenment, the end of the Catholic Monarchies, and the declaration of war on the Church. We can say that the New World Order is the antithesis of Christian society, it would be the realization of the diabolical Civitas Diaboli – City of the Devil – opposed to the Civitas Dei – City of God – in the eternal struggle between Light and Darkness, Good and Evil, God and Satan.In this struggle, Providence has placed the Church of Christ, and in particular the Supreme Pontiff, as kathèkon – that is, the one who opposes the manifestation of the mystery of iniquity (2 Thess 2:6-7). And Sacred Scripture warns us that at the manifestation of the Antichrist, this obstacle – the kathèkon – will have ceased to exist. It seems quite evident to me that the end times are now approaching before our eyes, since the mystery of iniquity has spread throughout the world with the disappearance of the courageous opposition of the kathèkon.With regard to the incompatibility between the City of God and the City of Satan, the Jesuit advisor to Francis, Antonio Spadaro, sets aside Sacred Scripture and Tradition, making the Bergoglian embrassons-nous his own. According to the Director of La Civiltà Cattolica, the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti“also remains a message with a strong political value, because – we could say – it overturns the logic of the apocalypse that prevails today. It is the fundamentalist logic that fights against the world, because it believes that it is the opposite of God, that is, an idol, and therefore to be destroyed as soon as possible in order to accelerate the end of time. The abyss of the apocalypse, in fact, before which there are no more brothers: only apostates or martyrs running “against” time. […] We are not militants or apostates, but all brothers.”[1]This strategy of discrediting the interlocutor with the slur of “integralist” is evidently aimed at facilitating the action of the enemy within the Church, seeking to disarm the opposition and discourage dissent. We also find it in the civil sphere, where the democrats and the deep statearrogate to themselves the right to decide whom to grant political legitimacy and whom to condemn without appeal to media ostracism. The method is always the same, because the one inspiring is the same. Just as the falsification of History and of the sources, is always the same: if the past disavows the revolutionary narrative, the followers of the Revolution censor the past and replace historical fact with a myth. Even St. Francis is a victim of this adulteration that would have him be the standard-bearer of poverty and pacifism, that are as alien to the spirit of Catholic orthodoxy as they are instrumental to the dominant ideology. Proof of this is the last, fraudulent recourse to the Poverello of Assisi in Fratelli Tutti to justify dialogue, ecumenism, and the universal brotherhood of the Bergoglian anti-church.Let us not make the mistake of presenting the current events as “normal,” judging what happens with the legal, canonical, and sociological parameters that such normality would presuppose. In extraordinary times – and the present crisis in the Church is indeed extraordinary – events go beyond the ordinary known to our fathers. In extraordinary times, we can hear a Pope deceive the faithful; see Princes of the Church accused of crimes that in other times would have aroused horror and been met with severe punishment; witness in our churches liturgical rites that seem to have been invented by Cranmer’s perverse mind; see Prelates process the unclean idol of the pachamama into St. Peter’s Basilica; and hear the Vicar of Christ apologize to the worshippers of that simulacrum if a Catholic dares to throw it into the Tiber. In these extraordinary times, we hear a conspirator – Cardinal Godfried Danneels – tell us that, since the death of John Paul II, the Mafia of St. Gallen had been plotting to elect one of their own to Peter’s Chair, which later turned out to be Jorge Mario Bergoglio. In the face of this disconcerting revelation, we might well be astonished that neither Cardinals nor Bishops expressed their indignation nor asked that the truth be brought to light.The coexistence of good and evil, of saints and the damned, in the ecclesial body, has always accompanied the earthly events of the Church, beginning with the betrayal of the Judas Iscariot. And it is indeed significant that the anti-church tries to rehabilitate Judas – and with him the worst heresiarchs – as exemplary models, “anti-saints” and “anti-martyrs,” and thereby legitimizing themselves in their own heresies, immorality and vices. The coexistence – I was saying – of the good and the wicked, of which the Gospel speaks in the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares, seems to have morphed into the prevalence of the latter over the former. The difference is that vice and deviations once despised are today not only practiced and tolerated more, but even encouraged and praised, while virtue and fidelity to the teaching of Christ are despised, mocked and even condemned.THE ECLIPSE OF THE TRUE CHURCHFor sixty years, we have witnessed the eclipse of the true Church by an anti-church that has progressively appropriated her name, occupied the Roman Curia and her Dicasteries, Dioceses and Parishes, Seminaries and Universities, Convents and Monasteries. The anti-church has usurped her authority, and its ministers wear her sacred garments; it uses her prestige and power to appropriate her treasures, assets, and finances.Just as happens in nature, this eclipse does not take place all at once; it passes from light to darkness when a celestial body inserts itself between the sun and us. This is a relatively slow but inexorable process, in which the moon of the anti-church follows its orbit until it overlaps the sun, generating a cone of shadow that projects over the earth. We now find ourselves in this doctrinal, moral, liturgical, and disciplinary cone of shadow. It is not yet the totaleclipse that we will see at the end of time, under the reign of the Antichrist. But it is a partialeclipse, which lets us see the luminous crown of the sun encircling the black disk of the moon.The process that led to today’s eclipse of the Church began with Modernism, without a doubt. The anti-church followed its orbit despite the solemn condemnations of the Magisterium, which in that phase shone with the splendor of Truth. But with the Second Vatican Council, the darkness of this spurious entity came over the Church. Initially it obscured only a small part, but the darkness gradually increased. Whoever then pointed to the sun, deducing that the moon would certainly obscure it, was accused of being a “prophet of doom,” with those forms of fanaticism and intemperance that arise from ignorance and prejudice. The case of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and a few other Prelates confirms, on the one hand, the far-sightedness of these shepherds and, on the other hand, the disjointed reaction of their adversaries; who, out of fear of losing power, used all their authority to deny the evidence and kept hidden their own true intentions.To continue the analogy: we can say that, in the sky of the Faith, an eclipse is a rare and extraordinary phenomenon. But to deny that, during the eclipse, darkness spreads – just because this does not happen under ordinary conditions – is not a sign of faith in the indefectibility of the Church, but rather an obstinate denial of the evidence, or bad faith. The Holy Church, according to Christ’s promises, will never be overwhelmed by the gates of hell, but that does not mean that she will not be – or is not already – overshadowed by her infernal forgery, that moon which, not by chance, we see under the feet of the Woman of the Revelation: “A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars” (Rev 12:1).The moon lies under the feet of the Woman who is above all mutability, above all earthly corruption, above the law of fate and the kingdom of the spirit of this world. And this is because that Woman, who is at once the image of Mary Most Holy and of the Church, is amicta sole, clothed with the Sun of Righteousness that is Christ, “exempted from all demonic power as she takes part in the mystery of the immutability of Christ” (Saint Ambrose). She remains unbruised if not in her militant kingdom, certainly in the suffering one in Purgatory and in the triumphant one in Paradise. St. Jerome, commenting on the words of Scripture, reminds us that “the gates of hell are sins and vices, especially the teachings of heretics.” We know therefore that even the “synthesis of all heresies” represented by Modernism and its updated conciliar version, can never definitively obscure the splendor of the Bride of Christ, but only for the brief period of the eclipse that Providence, in its infinite wisdom, has allowed, to draw from it a greater good.THE ABANDONMENT OF THE SUPERNATURAL DIMENSIONIn this talk, I wish especially to deal with the relationship between the revolution of Vatican II and the establishment of the New World Order. The focal element of this analysis consists in highlighting the abandonment on the part of the ecclesiastical Hierarchy, even at the top, of the supernatural dimension of the Church and its eschatological role. With the Council, the Innovators erased the divine origin of the Church from their theological horizon, creating an entity of human origin similar to a philanthropic organization. The first consequence of this ontological subversion was the necessary denial of the fact that the Bride of Christ is not, and cannot be, subject to change by those who exercise vicarious authority in the name of the Lord. She is neither the property of the Pope nor of the Bishops or theologians, and, as such, any attempt at “Aggiornamento” lowers her to the level of a company that, in order to garner profit, renews its own commercial offer, sells its leftovers stock, and follows the fashion of the moment. The Church, on the other hand, is a supernatural and divine reality: she adapts the way she preaches the Gospel to the nations, but she can never change the content of a single iota (Mt 5:18), nor deny her transcendent momentum by lowering herself to mere social service. On the opposite side, the anti-church proudly lays claims to the right to perform a paradigm shift not only by changing the way doctrine is expounded, but the doctrine itself. This is confirmed by the words of Massimo Fagggioli comment on the new Encyclical Fratelli Tutti:“Pope Francis’ pontificate is like a standard lifted up before Catholic integralists and those who equate material continuity and tradition: Catholic doctrine does not just develop. Sometimes it really changes: for example on [the] death penalty, [and] war.”[2]Insisting on what the Magisterium teaches is useless. The Innovators’ brazen claim to have the right to change the Faith stubbornly follows the modernist approach.The Council’s first error consists mainly in the lack of a transcendent perspective – the result of a spiritual crisis that was already latent – and in the attempt to establish paradise on earth, with a sterile human horizon. In line with this approach, Fratelli tutti sees the fulfillment of an earthly utopia and social redemption in human brotherhood, pax œcumenica between religions and welcoming migrants.THE SENSE OF INFERIORITY AND INADEQUACYAs I have written on other occasions, the revolutionary demands of the Nouvelle Théologiefound fertile ground in the Council Fathers because of a serious inferiority complex vis-à-vis the world. There was a time, in the postwar period, when the revolution led by Freemasonry in the civil, political and cultural spheres, breached the Catholic élite, persuading it of its inadequacy in the face of an epochal challenge that is now inescapable. Instead of questioning themselves and their faith, this élite – bishops, theologians, intellectuals – recklessly attributed responsibility for the imminent failure of the Church to her rock-solid hierarchical structure, and to her monolithic doctrinal and moral teaching. Looking at the defeat of the European civilization that the Church had helped to form, the élite thought that the lack of agreement with the world was caused by the intransigence of the Papacy and the moral rigidity of priests not wanting to come to terms with the Zeitgeist, and “open up.” This ideological approach stems from the false assumption that, between the Church and the contemporary world, there can be an alliance, a consonance of intent, a friendship. Nothing could be further from the truth, since there can be no respite in the struggle between God and Satan, between Light and Darkness. “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Gen 3:15). This is an enmity willed by God Himself, which places Mary Most Holy – and the Church – as eternal enemies of the ancient serpent. The world has its own prince (Jn 12:31), who is the “enemy” (Mt 13:28), a “murderer from the beginning” (Jn 8:44) and a “liar” (Jn 8:44). Courting a pact of non-belligerence with the world means coming to terms with Satan. This overturns and perverts the very essence of the Church, whose mission is to convert as many souls to Christ for the greater glory of God, without ever laying down arms against those who want to attract them to themselves and to damnation.The Church’s sense of inferiority and failure before the world created the “perfect storm” for the revolution to take root in the Council Fathers and by extension in the Christian people, in whom obedience to the Hierarchy had been cultivated perhaps more than fidelity to the depositum fidei. Let me it be clear: obedience to the Sacred Pastors is certainly praiseworthy if the commands are legitimate. But obedience ceases to be a virtue and, in fact, becomes servility if it is an end in itself and if it contradicts the purpose to which it is ordained, namely Faith and Morals. We should add, that this sense of inferiority was introduced into the ecclesial body with displays of great theater, such as the removal of the tiara by Paul VI, the return of the Ottoman flagship banners conquered at Lepanto, the flaunted ecumenical embraces with the schismatic Athenagoras, the requests for forgiveness for the Crusades, the abolition of the Index, the Clergy’s focus on the poor in place to the alleged triumphalism of Pius XII. The coup de grâce of this attitude was codified in the Reformed Liturgy, which manifests its embarrassment of Catholic dogma by silencing it – and thus denying it indirectly. The ritual change engendered a doctrinal change, which led the faithful to believe that the Mass is a simple fraternal banquet and that the Most Holy Eucharist is merely a symbol of Christ’s presence among us.“IDEM SENTIRE” OF REVOLUTION AND COUNCILThe Council Fathers’ sense of inadequacy was only increased by the work of the Innovators, whose heretical ideas coincided with the demands of the world. A comparative analysis of modern thought confirms the idem sentire [same feeling or same mind] of the conspirators with every element of the revolutionary ideology:– the acceptance of the democratic principle as the legitimizing source of power, in place of the divine right of the Catholic Monarchy (including the Papacy);– the creation and accumulation of organs of power, in place of personal responsibility and institutional hierarchy;– the erasure of the historical past, evaluated with today’s parameters, which fail to defend tradition and cultural heritage;– the emphasis on the freedom of individuals and the weakening of the concept of responsibility and duty;– the continuous evolution of morality and ethics, thus deprived of their immutable nature and of any transcendent reference;– the presumed secular nature of the State, in place of the rightful submission of civil order to the Kingship of Jesus Christ and the ontological superiority of the Church’s mission over that of the temporal sphere;– the equality of religions not only before the State, but even as a general concept to which the Church must conform, against the objective and necessary defense of the Truth and the condemnation of error;– the false and blasphemous concept of the dignity of man as connatural to him, based on the denial of original sin and of the need for Redemption as a premise for pleasing God, meriting His Grace and attaining eternal beatitude;– the undermining of the role of women, the contempt and a contempt for the privilege of motherhood;– the primacy of matter over spirit;– the fideistic relationship with science[3], in the face of a ruthless criticism of religion on false scientific grounds.  All these principles, propagated by Freemasonry ideologues and New World Order supporters, coincide with the revolutionary ideas of the Council:– the democratization of the Church began with Lumen Gentium and today it is realized in the Bergoglian synodal path;– the creation and accumulation of organs of power has been achieved by delegating decision-making roles to Episcopal Conferences, Synods of Bishops, Commissions, Pastoral Councils, etc.;– the Church’s past and glorious traditions are judged according to the modern mentality and condemned in order to curry favor with the modern world;– the “freedom of the children of God” theorized by Vatican II has been established regardless of the moral duties of individuals who, according to the conciliar fairytales, are all saved regardless of their inner dispositions and the state of their soul;– the obfuscating of perennial moral references has led to the revised doctrine on capital punishment; and, with Amoris Laetitia, the admission of public adulterers to the Sacraments, cracking the sacramental edifice;– the adoption of the concept of secularism has led to the abolition of a State Religion in Catholic nations. Encouraged by the Holy See and the Episcopate, this has led to a loss of religious identity and the recognition of rights of sects, as well as the approval of norms that violate natural and divine law;– the religious freedom theorized in Dignitatis Humanae is today brought to its logical and extreme consequences with the Declaration of Abu Dhabi and the latest Encyclical Fratelli Tutti, rendering the saving mission of the Church and the Incarnation itself obsolete;– theories on human dignity in the Catholic sphere have led to confusion about the role of the laity with respect to the ministerial role of the Clergy and a weakening of the hierarchical structure of the Church. While the embrace of feminist ideology is a prelude to the admission of women to the Holy Orders;– an inordinate preoccupation with the temporal needs of the poor, so typical of the left, has transformed the Church into a sort of welfare association, limiting her activity to the mere material sphere, almost to the point of abandoning the spiritual;– subservience to modern science and technological progress has led the Church to disavow the “Queen of the Science” [Faith], to “demythologize” miracles, to deny the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, to look at the most sacred Mysteries of our Holy Religion as “myths” or “metaphors,” sacrilegiously suggesting that Transubstantiation and the Resurrection itself are “magic” (not to be taken literally but rather symbolically), and to describe the sublime Marian dogmas are “tonterias” [nonsense].There is an almost grotesque aspect of this leveling and dumbing down of the Hierarchy to comply with mainstream thought. The hierarchy’s desire to please its persecutors and serve its enemies always comes too late and is out of sync, giving the impression that the Bishops are irremediably outdated, indeed not in step with the times. They lead those who see them so enthusiastically conniving with their own extinction to believe that this demonstration of courtesan submission to politically correct comes not so much from a true ideological persuasion, but rather from the fear of being swept away, of losing power, and no longer having that prestige that the world still pays them, nonetheless. They do not realize – or do not want to admit – that the prestige and authority whose custodians they are, comes from the authority and prestige of the Church of Christ, and not from the miserable, pitiful counterfeit of her which they have fashioned.When this anti-church is fully established in the total eclipse of the Catholic Church, the authority of its leaders will depend on the degree of subjugation to the New World Order, which will not tolerate any divergence from its own creed and will ruthlessly apply that dogmatism, fanaticism, and fundamentalism that many Prelates and self-styled intellectuals criticize in those who remain faithful to the Magisterium today. In this way, the deep churchmay continue to bear the trademark “Catholic Church,” but it will be the slave of the New Order thinking, reminiscent of the Jews who, after denying the Kingship of Christ before Pilate, were enslaved to the civil authority of their time: “We have no other king but Caesar” (Jn 19:15). Today’s Caesar commands us to close the churches, wear a mask, and suspend the celebrations under the pretext of a pseudo-pandemic. The communist regime persecutes the Chinese Catholics, and the world hears nothing but silence from Rome. Tomorrow a new Titus will sack the Council temple, transporting its remains to some museum, and divine vengeance at the hands of the pagans will have been achieved once again.THE INSTRUMENTAL ROLE OF THE MODERATE CATHOLICS IN THE REVOLUTIONSome might say that the Council Fathers and Popes who presided over that assembly, did not realize the implications that their approval of the Vatican II documents would have for the future of the Church. If this were the case – i.e., if there had been any subsequent regrets in their hasty approval of heretical texts or texts close to heresy – it is difficult to understand why they were unable to put an immediate stop to abuses, correct errors, clarify misunderstandings and omissions. And above all, it is incomprehensible why the ecclesiastical Authority has been so ruthless against those who defended the Catholic Truth, and, at the same time, were so terribly accommodating to rebels and heretics. In any case, the responsibility for the conciliar crisis must be laid at the feet of the Authority which, even amid a thousand appeals to collegiality and pastoralism, has jealously guarded its prerogatives, exercising them only in one direction, that is, against the pusillus grex[little flock] and never against the enemies of God and of the Church. The very rare exceptions, when a heretic theologian or revolutionary religious has been censored by the Holy Office, only offer tragic confirmation of a rule that has been enforced for decades; not to mention that many of them, in recent times, have been rehabilitated without any abjuration of their errors and even promoted to institutional positions in the Roman Curia or Pontifical Athenaeums.This is the reality, as it emerges from my analysis. However, we know that, in addition to the progressive wing of the Council and the traditional Catholic wing, there is a part of the Episcopate, the clergy, and the people that attempts to keep equal distance from what it considers two extremes. I am talking about the so-called “conservatives,” that is, a centrist part of the ecclesial body that ends up “carrying water” for the Revolutionaries because, while rejecting their excesses, it shares the same principles. The error of the “conservatives” lies in giving a negative connotation to traditionalism and in placing it on the opposite side of progressivism. Their aurea mediocritas [via media] consists in arbitrarily placing themselves not between two vices, but between virtue and vice. They are the ones who criticize the excesses of the pachamama or of the most extreme of Bergoglio’s statements, but who do not tolerate the Council’s being questioned, let alone the intrinsic link between the conciliar cancer and the current metastasis. The correlation between political conservatism and religious conservatism consists in adopting the “center,” a synthesis between the “right” thesis and the “left” antithesis, according to the Hegelian approach so cherished by moderate supporters of the Council.In the civil sphere, the deep state has managed political and social dissent by using organizations and movements that are only apparently opposition, but which are actually instrumental to maintaining power. Similarly, in the ecclesial sphere, the deep church uses the moderate “conservatives” to give an appearance of offering freedom to the faithful. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum itself, for example, while granting the celebration in the extraordinary form, demands saltem impliciter [at least implicitly] that we accept the Council and recognize the lawfulness of the reformed liturgy. This ploy prevents those who benefit from the Motu Proprio from raising any objection, or they risk the dissolution of the Ecclesia Dei communities. And it instills in the Christian people the dangerous idea that a good thing, in order to have legitimacy in the Church and society, must necessarily be accompanied by a bad thing or at least something less good. However, only a misguided mind would seek to afford equal rights to both good and evil. It matters little if one is personally in favor of good, when he recognizes the legitimacy of those who are in favor of evil. In this sense, the “freedom to choose” abortion theorized by democratic politicians finds its counterbalance in the no less aberrant “religious freedom” theorized by the Council, which today is stubbornly defended by the anti-church. If it is not permissible for a Catholic to support a politician who defends the right to abortion, it is even less permissible to approve a Prelate who defends the “freedom” of an individual to endanger his immortal soul by “choosing” to remain in mortal sin. This is not mercy; this is gross dereliction of spiritual duty before God in order to curry the favor and approval of Man.“OPEN SOCIETY” AND “OPEN RELIGION”This analysis would hardly be complete without a word on the neo-language so popular in the ecclesiastical sphere. Traditional Catholic vocabulary has been deliberately modified, in order to change the content it expresses. The same has happened in the liturgy and preaching, where the clarity of the Catholic exposition has been replaced by ambiguity or the implicit denial of dogmatic truth. The examples are endless. This phenomenon also goes back to Vatican II, which sought to develop “Catholic” versions of the slogans of the world. Nevertheless, I would like to emphasize that all those expressions that are borrowed from secularist lexicons are also part of the neo-language. Let us consider the Bergoglio’s insistence on the “outgoing church,” on openness as a positive value. Similarly, I quote now from Fratelli tutti: “A living and dynamic people, a people with a future, is one constantly opento a new synthesis through its ability to welcome differences” (Fratelli Tutti, 160).“The Church is a home with open doors” (ibid. 276).“We want to be a Church that serves, that leaves home and goes forth from its places of worship, goes forth from its sacristies, in order to accompanylife, to sustain hope, to be the sign of unity… to build bridges, to break down walls, to sow seeds of reconciliation” (ibid.).The similarity with the Open Society sought after by Soros’ globalist ideology is so striking as to almost constitute an Open Religion counterpoint to it.And this Open Religion is perfectly in tune with the intentions of globalism. From the political meetings “for a New Humanism” blessed by the leaders of the Church to the participation of the progressive intelligentsia in green propaganda, it all chases after the mainstream thought, in the sad and grotesque attempt to please the world. The stark contrast with the words of the Apostle is clear: “Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10).The Catholic Church lives under the gaze of God; she exists for His glory and for the salvation of souls. The anti-church lives under the gaze of the world, pandering to the blasphemous apotheosis of man and the damnation of souls. During the last session of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, before all the Synod Fathers, these astonishing words of Paul VI resounded in the Vatican Basilica:“The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God. And what happened? Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation? There could have been, but there was none. The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council. A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it. The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself). But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind.”[4]This sympathy – in the etymological sense of συμπάϑεια, that is, participation in the sentiment of the other – is the figure of the Council and of the new religion (for such it is) of the anti-church. An anti-church born of the unclean union between the Church and the world, between the heavenly Jerusalem and hellish Babylon. Note well: the first time a Pontiff mentioned the “new humanism” was at the final session of Vatican II, and today we find it repeated as a mantra by those who consider it a perfect and coherent expression of the revolutionary mens[frame of mind] of the Council.[5]Always in view of this communion of intent between the New World Order and the anti-church, we must remember the Global Compact on Education, a project designed by Bergoglio “to generate a change on a planetary scale, so that education is a creator of brotherhood, peace and justice. An even more urgent need in this time marked by the pandemic”.[6] Promoted in collaboration with the United Nations, this “process of formation in the relationship and culture of encounter also finds space and value in the ‘common home’ with all creatures, since people, just as they are formed to the logic of communion and solidarity, are already working “to recover serene harmony with creation”, and to configure the world as “a space of true brotherhood” (Gaudium et Spes, 37).”…

An ‘unusually successful president’ may be swindled out of victory

Only those who wish the pre-eminence of totalitarian China and Spengler’s long-awaited Decline of the West should be ululating with joy at the thought of a Biden victory 

By: Conrad Black

 October 31, 2020

  Donald Trump has bumptious, churlish and even juvenile moments that have grated on me as they have on his detractors, but they are insignificant compared to questions that are at stake in Tuesday’s election. 
His opponent, Joe Biden, is only in contention because the American media is overwhelmingly anti-Trump, as evidenced by numerous reports out of Harvard and the Pew Research Centre showing that coverage of his administration has been over 90 per cent negative. 
This and the media’s frenzied campaign to incite panic over the coronavirus and the practice in some Democratically governed states of allowing ballots apparently postmarked by election day to be counted for an additional six days have lifted Biden out of his candidate protection program. 
And, if Biden wins, the politicization of the senior ranks of the FBI and intelligence agencies to try to alter the 2016 presidential election (before and after election day), the greatest constitutional scandal in American history, will be swept under the rug. 
So will official curiosity about the $9.44 million the Biden family is alleged by the president to have received from Russia, Ukraine and China while Biden was vice-president. No evidence has surfaced that it influenced government policy, but it has been the subject of colossal campaign untruths and a scandalous effort by the social media to throttle News Corporation, especially the New York Post and Fox News, and even the White House press secretary, to prevent them from discussing the issue. 
A Biden victory would be a triumph for the morally bankrupt American national political media and their almost airtight Trump-hate misinformation campaign (slavishly echoed by Canada’s media). 
Biden (in Cromwellian terms) is a decayed servitor, a semi-senescent wax-works dummy hiding in his basement as part of the Democratic media’s COVID-19 hysteria campaign. 
The media have conducted the Democratic campaign and have helped reduce public respect for the media to below 20 per cent. 
Democracy requires a free press that is valued and deserves respect. Validating the media’s disgraceful conduct in this campaign could substantially undermine the prestige and credibility of American democracy in the eyes of Americans themselves. 
There has not been a more important American election at least since FDR’s victory for aid to the democracies and an immense arms build-up when he sought a third term in 1940. 
Trump’s re-election is the only way of restoring the conditions that he created that effectively eliminated unemployment prior to the onset of the COVID-19 crisis. This, coupled to his near-elimination of illegal immigration (against fierce Democratic resistance), of 500,000 to one million unskilled Latin-Americans a year, generated greater percentage income growth amongst the lowest 20 percent of income-earners than among the top 10 per cent — a noteworthy start on addressing the universal income-disparity problem. 
Only a Trump victory will ensure retention of the present relatively low personal and corporate income-tax rates and the avoidance of insane COVID shutdowns. As I wrote here last week, that virus only mortally threatens a small percentage of the population, who can be isolated and protected. 
The charge that Trump has botched the COVID crisis, like the fatuous claims that he is a racist and misogynist, is bunk. He inherited a decrepit health crisis response system that required all tests to be made by appointment in hospitals and sent to Atlanta for evaluation. 
There were acute shortages of everything that was needed. He managed swiftly through all that and advanced the timetable for a vaccine, which is the only serious defence, by over a year. 
Meanwhile, America’s economic performance has been the best in the world — twice as strong as Canada’s, and 60 per cent better even than Japan or Germany. The U.S GDP rebounded in the third quarter at the astonishing annual rate of 33 per cent. 
Only a Trump victory will prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear military power within five years and North Korea from resuming its missile tests over Japan and South Korea. 
It is unlikely that Biden would maintain a firm but not belligerent economic and strategic containment strategy towards China, co-ordinated with India, Japan, South Korea, and other key allies in south and east Asia and Australasia. 
The Democrats are committed to giving the PLO and Hamas a veto over any resolution of their conflict with Israel, and since they do not accept the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, that will ensure continued stagnation, attrition and terrorism, financed by a newly re-enabled Iran. 
The Trump two-state strategy with strong economic incentives is steadily lining up the support of the Arab world. 
Biden would reassume the self-flagellating Paris Climate Accord, and the $100 trillion Green Terror — the Green New Deal assault on the petroleum industry and a bone-cracking rise in electricity costs after closing gas-fired electricity plants. This administration has protected the environment, but not by disemploying millions of people. 
Trump will continue to promote private, charter, community,and separate schools that will reverse the steady decline of educational standards generated by the teachers’ unions, to which the Democratic party is bound hand and foot (a familiar problem in Canada). 
Although he has been tactically mistaken in not producing his full alternative health-care plan, Trump will not reinforce Obamacare’s destruction of doctor–patient relationships with the Democrats’ hideously expensive socialist alternative. 
Only Trump can ensure that the concept of freedom of religion will not be bulldozed by such tyrannical outrages as requiring the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for the contraception and abortions of their students and employees. 
The United States has five per cent of the world’s population and 25 percent of its incarcerated people. Trump has acted on penal reform. The American criminal-justice system is a disgrace, and both Biden and vice-presidential nominee Kamala Harris, the former attorney general of California, are complicit in that disgrace, and won’t do anything about it. 
The Democrats are tainted by their intimate dependence upon their corrupt urban political machines and by having maintained a low profile all summer as the worst rioting in America in over 50 years raged across the country. Hooligans burned and stole and vandalized billions of dollars of property, nearly 40 people were killed and over 700 police injured by mobs masquerading as civil rights crusaders. 
They tried to destroy statues of some America’s greatest leaders, including those most dedicated to the advancement of African-Americans: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant. 
The Democrats would assault the existing constitutional system, including a neutralization of the Electoral College by imposing the victory of the candidate with the most votes nationwide even in states that voted for other candidates, effectively disenfranchising the 25 smaller-population states in the country. 
It would also include packing the Supreme Court and a renewed relaxation of entry of illegal migrants and the confirmation of the inability to screen non-citizens as ineligible voters in presidential elections. 
The District of Columbia and Puerto Rico would be admitted as states to provide four more Democratic senators, and the lowering of the voting age to 16 would ensure prolonged Democratic predominance. 
Trump has stopped all talk of China inevitably surpassing the U.S. 
Biden is pathologically mediocre, Harris is a compulsive chucklehead and Trump is a quasi-vulgarian but a very effective executive. 
An unusually successful president faces a dual personification of weakness and vacuity. 
Only those who wish the pre-eminence of totalitarian China and Spengler’s long-awaited Decline of the West should be ululating with joy at the thought of a Biden victory. 

Email link  https://conta.cc/3mFKzMi

Rip McIntosh

Joe Biden Announces A New Policy to Support “Trunalimunumaprzure”…

Posted on October 30, 2020 by sundance

In an effort to drive home his campaign in the final days, former vice-president Joe Biden is pulling out all the stops with a new policy initiative called “trunalimunumaprzure.”https://www.youtube.com/embed/u69CSMrbPXY?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

.

And then things got weird…

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=thelastrefuge2&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1322306258892967936&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2F2020%2F10%2F30%2Fjoe-biden-announces-a-new-policy-to-support-trunalimunumaprzure%2F&siteScreenName=thelastrefuge2&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Tweet

See new Tweets

Tweet

Joe Kamal@Joe_Kamal_·19hWho did this?? This was whipped up in record time. Lol this is gold. Ultimate trolling.From Prison Mitch

Dr. Fauci’s Chilling Ties to the Chinese Communist PartyThis new report reveals Dr. Anthony Fauci’s little-known ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its military, claiming Fauci has been the major force behind research activities that enabled the release of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan labs. How exactly did he help the CCP?READ MORE

Fauci’s Treacherous Ties to China and Globalists

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaOctober 30, 2020

Fauci’s Pandemic: How He Caused It and Uses It. – YouTubeBased on the in-depth scientific and historical report, “Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery with Chilling Ties to the Chinese Military” on Breggin.com in the Coronav…www.youtube.com

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• A report by Dr. Peter Breggin reveals Dr. Anthony Fauci’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and globalists who have profited from the pandemic measures promoted by him as the leader of the U.S. Coronavirus Task Force
• Fauci has been the major force behind research activities that enabled the Chinese Communist Party to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release — whether accidental or not — of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Institute of Virology
• In collaboration with the CCP and the World Health Organization, Fauci initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world
• Fauci has supported and praised Director-General of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a member of a Marxist-Leninist Ethiopian political party with a corrupt past and terrorist ties who has also been accused of covering up cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia
• Fauci recently published a paper in which he dismisses the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, arguing instead for natural mutation. He also uses the pandemic to justify the “green new deal” and the globalist movement known as “the Great Reset”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, this year rose to national prominence as the leader of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. By the time everything is said and done, he may end up wishing he’d gained less public exposure.

In the October 19, 2020, report¹ “Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery,” Dr. Peter Breggin reveals Fauci’s “chilling ties” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its military.

A second, legal, report² by Breggin titled “COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society,” was filed in a federal court in Ohio, August 31, 2020, as part of a lawsuit and injunction to put an end to the state’s pandemic measures.

According to Breggin, Fauci “has been the major force” behind research activities that enabled the CCP to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release — whether accidental or not — of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in Wuhan, China.

Breggin claims Fauci has helped the CCP obtain “valuable U.S. patents,” and that he, in collaboration with the CCP and the World Health Organization, initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world.

Fauci has, and continues to, shield the CCP and himself, Breggin says, by “denying the origin of SARS-CoV-2” and “delaying and thwarting worldwide attempts to deal rationally with the pandemic.”

Gain-of-Function Research Supported by Fauci

In the executive summary of the report, Breggin documents 15 questionable activities that Fauci has been engaged in, starting with the fact that he funded dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, both by individual Chinese researchers and the WIV in collaboration with American researchers. This research, Breggin says, allowed the CCP and its military to create their own bioweapons, including SARS-CoV-2.

He points out that the American-Chinese collaboration was initially detailed in a paper written by two Chinese researchers, Botao Xiao (trained at Northwestern University and Harvard Medical School) and Lei Xiao back in February 2020. According to Breggin, the CCP forced them to recant and the paper was withdrawn.

“The stated purpose [of gain-of-function research] is to learn to prevent and treat future outbreaks; but research labs are the most common source of outbreaks from dangerous pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2, as well as two earlier accidental escapes by SARS viruses in 2004 from a research facility in Beijing,” Breggin writes.³

As previously reported by Newsweek,⁴ the NIAID-funded gain-of-function research into bat coronaviruses was conducted in two parts. The first, which began in 2014 and ended in 2019,⁵ focused on “understanding the risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” Initial findings⁶ were published in Nature Medicine in 2015.

The program, which had a budget of $3.7 million, was led by Wuhan virologist Shi Zheng-Li and sought to catalogue wild bat coronaviruses. It also involved U.S. scientists such as Ralph Barric from the University of North Carolina and Charles Lieber from Harvard.⁷

The second phase that began in 2019 included additional surveillance of coronaviruses along with gain-of-function research to investigate how bat coronaviruses might mutate to affect humans. This second phase was run by the EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit research group led by Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. According to Newsweek, the project proposal explained the research to be conducted as follows:⁸

“’We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential.’

In layman’s terms, ‘spillover potential’ refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organs.

According to Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University, the project description refers to experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering. In the wake of the pandemic, that is a noteworthy detail.”

Why Did Fauci Continue Gain-of-Function Research?

While President Trump canceled funding for dangerous gain-of-function research on viruses in April 2020 after the Chinese-American collaborations became publicly known, Fauci has since “unleashed a deluge of new funding that will almost certainly” benefit Chinese scientists with CCP ties who are still working in various U.S. universities and other research facilities.

Part of the funding is again directed to the EcoHealth Alliance, which for years has outsourced its research projects to WIV and other Chinese researchers. That said, recent reports indicate the NIH is now demanding the organization produce records detailing its work with the Wuhan lab before the funding is released.⁹

Fauci also continued outsourcing gain-of-function research to the WIV back in 2014, after then-President Obama ordered a stop to such research. At the time, he also continued to fund collaborations between U.S. and WIV researchers, led by Vineet Menachery, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina.

“In order to outsource dangerous viral research from the U.S. to China during the Obama moratorium, Fauci prematurely approved the Wuhan Institute as a highest level containment facility (known as BSL-4) capable of safely working with lethal viruses,” Breggin writes.¹⁰

“He did this while knowing the Institute had a very poor safety record and while also knowing that all such facilities in China are overseen by the military as part of its biowarfare program. Thus, Fauci created two grave worldwide threats, the accidental release of a deadly coronavirus and/or its use as a military weapon.”

Interestingly, while the original moratorium on gain-of-function research was a direct order by the President, when the moratorium was lifted at the end of 2017, it was done so by the National Institutes of Health and the NIAID.

Fauci holds himself out as the ultimate source of objective scientific information and science-based conclusions. In reality, he works with and empowers globalist pharmaceutical firms and globalist organizations … These globalists gained power and influence as their policies and practices, including the shutdowns, continue to worsen conditions throughout the world. ~ Dr. Peter Breggin

Fauci also defended and promoted gain-of-function research on bird flu viruses a decade ago, saying such research was worth the risk because it allows scientists to prepare for pandemics.¹¹ However, as noted by Breggin, this kind of research does not appear to have improved governments’ pandemic responses one whit.

Downplaying COVID-19 Risks

Next, Breggin points out Fauci’s connections to and support of Director-General of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a member of a Marxist-Leninist Ethiopian political party whose corrupt past and terrorist ties have been highlighted ever since his controversial nomination.^12,13,14 Incidentally, Tedros has also been accused of covering up cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia.

“Together, they initially minimized the dangers of COVID-19. Fauci and Tedros also delayed worldwide preparations for the pandemic while allowing the Chinese to spread the virus with thousands of international passenger flights,” Breggin writes, adding:

“Fauci publicly undermined the President’s criticism of Director-General Tedros and China. Instead, Fauci reassured the world that Tedros was a trustworthy and ‘outstanding’ man — implying that Tedros’s connections in China were similarly reliable and could be trusted.”

Fauci’s Globalist Ties

Interestingly, Fauci recently published a paper in which he again dismisses the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and released from the WIV, arguing instead for a natural mutation.

“By persistently and unequivocally claiming that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from nature untouched by lab manipulations, Fauci continues to protect himself and China, and their relationship, to the endangerment of America and the rest of the world,” Breggin writes.

“Fauci holds himself out as the ultimate source of objective scientific information and science-based conclusions. In reality, he works with and empowers globalist pharmaceutical firms and globalist organizations such as WHO and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation … These globalists gained power and influence as their policies and practices, including the shutdowns, continue to worsen conditions throughout the world.”

The globalist, technocratic agenda also shines through Fauci’s call for a political agenda that protects the population from pathogens by limiting or eliminating “aggressive” and manmade interventions into nature. Fauci’s paper, published in the journal Cell in September 2020, reads in part:¹⁵

“The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder … that in a human-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences.

We remain at risk for the foreseeable future. COVID-19 is among the most vivid wake-up calls in over a century. It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature …”

Indeed, this language is straight out of the technocratic handbook, now rebranded as “the Great Reset.” As noted by Breggin:

“Fauci’s utopian scheme, which overlaps with the Green New Deal, would permanently suppress and disrupt the activities and lives of the 7.8 billion people on Earth in the vain hope of reducing future pandemics.

Thus the American official most responsible for the creation of SARS-CoV-2 in a Chinese lab instead blames its origins on human interventions into the environment and nature, thereby completely exonerating himself while holding humanity responsible.

Simultaneously, he is using the pretext of protecting us from viruses to impose a radical totalitarian agenda upon humanity. Indeed, the largest, most aggressive, and most dangerous human interventions into nature must include Fauci-funded gain-of-function research in which viruses are taken out of nature and engineered into pathogens.”

Fauci Continues to Hype COVID-19 Risks

In the main body of the report (Page 7 onward), Breggin goes on to detail Fauci’s role in the media fearmongering that has allowed pandemic measures to stretch from an initial call for a two-week lockdown to eight months and counting. “Most people have very unrealistic fears about the risk of dying from COVID-19,” Breggin notes, and “This is due in part to the CDC and to Dr. Anthony Fauci who inflate the risk of COVID-19 deaths.”

According to data¹⁶ released by the CDC August 26, 2020, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate. The remaining 94% had an average of 2.6 health conditions that contributed to their deaths.

“Most people who die while being positive for SARS-CoV-2 are near to or past their average longevity. In addition to being old, the great majority are already ill with heart disease, cancer, or some other chronic illnesses that may in fact have caused them to die.

But even using the CDC’s biased data, the risk of death for most people is too small to require them to sacrifice the quality of their lives as the government demands under the threat of catching COVID-19,” Breggin writes.

COVID-19 Is Less Lethal Than the Flu for Most

According to a September 2, 2020, article¹⁷ in Annals of Internal Medicine, the infection fatality ratio has been overestimated due to the fact that many who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 remain asymptomatic, which makes it difficult to estimate the true infection rate.

The researchers found that, when excluding those residing in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, the infection fatality rate for the average person is as follows:

• Overall (all ages) — 0.26%
• People younger than 40 — 0.01%
• People aged 60 or older — 1.71%

The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza listed in this paper is 0.8%. Other sources put it a little higher. In either case, this means that if you’re under the age of 60, your chance of dying from the flu is greater than your chance of dying from COVID-19.

Breggin cites CDC data, noting that the CDC is using inflated numbers, but even at that, the risk of death for people under the age of 70 is lower than that of the flu. According to CDC estimates, the infection fatality ratios are as follows:¹⁸

• 0-19 years — 0.003% (3 in 100,000)
• 20-49 years — 0.02%
• 50-69 years — 0.5%
• 70+ years — 5%

As noted by Breggin, the risk to children and youths is exceedingly small, “Yet Dr. Fauci and other public health officials continue to act as if there is a grave risk of exposing children and young adults to SARS-CoV-2, when there is not,” Breggin writes.

Breggin’s 55-page report¹⁹ is well worth reading in its entirety. It contains far more details than I’ve been able to provide in this overview, and is fully referenced.

Fauci Continues to Dismiss Hydroxychloroquine

Breggin’s legal report,²⁰ “COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society,” is also worth reading. It addresses the totalitarian threat posed by the global response to the pandemic, and details the psychological operations behind the fearmongering and the underhanded methods used to discredit hydroxychloroquine, among other things.

Included is an open letter to Fauci about his dismissal of hydroxychloroquine, signed by Drs. George C. Fareed, Michael M. Jacobs and Donald C. Pompan, which reads, in part:²¹

“Dear Dr. Fauci:

You were placed into the most high-profile role regarding America’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. Americans have relied on your medical expertise concerning the wearing of masks, resuming employment, returning to school, and of course medical treatment.

You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions … This is unusual in the medical profession in which doctors’ opinions are challenged by other physicians in the form of exchanges between doctors at hospitals, medical conferences, as well as debate in medical journals.

You render your opinions unchallenged, without formal public opposition from physicians who passionately disagree with you. It is incontestable that the public is best served when opinions and policy are based on the prevailing evidence and science, and able to withstand the scrutiny of medical professionals.

As experience accrued in treating COVID-19 infections, physicians worldwide discovered that high-risk patients can be treated successfully as an outpatient, within the first five to seven days of the onset of symptoms, with a ‘cocktail’ consisting of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin (or doxycycline). Multiple scholarly contributions to the literature detail the efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine-based combination treatment.

Dr. Harvey Risch, the renowned Yale epidemiologist, published an article in May 2020 in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled ‘Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to Pandemic Crisis’ …

Dr. Risch is an expert at evaluating research data and study designs, publishing over 300 articles. Dr. Risch’s assessment is that there is unequivocal evidence for the early and safe use of the ‘HCQ cocktail’ …

Yet, you continue to reject the use of hydroxychloroquine, except in a hospital setting in the form of clinical trials, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting its use. Hydroxychloroquine, despite 65 years of use for malaria, and over 40 years for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, with a well-established safety profile, has been deemed by you and the FDA as unsafe for use in the treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infections.

Your opinions have influenced the thinking of physicians and their patients, medical boards, state and federal agencies, pharmacists, hospitals, and just about everyone involved in medical decision making.

Indeed, your opinions impacted the health of Americans, and many aspects of our day-to-day lives including employment and school. Those of us who prescribe hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin/doxycycline believe fervently that early outpatient use would save tens of thousands of lives and enable our country to dramatically alter the response to COVID-19.

We advocate for an approach that will reduce fear and allow Americans to get their lives back. We hope that our questions compel you to reconsider your current approach to COVID-19 infection.”

Fauci — ‘An Extraordinarily Destructive Force’

In Breggin’s estimation, Fauci “has been and continues to be an extraordinarily destructive force in the world.” Not only did he play a role in China’s ability to create SARS-CoV-2 and other potential biological weapons, he’s also covering up its origin, and initially tried to downplay the threat of the novel virus.

To top it off, “he became the go-to scientist and management czar for the very pandemic that he helped to create, enormously increasing his power and influence, and the wealth of his institute and his global collaborators, including Bill Gates and the international pharmaceutical industry,” Breggin writes, adding, in conclusion:

“In his rise to power, Fauci has done a great deal of additional damage … for example, by suppressing the most effective, safest, and least expensive medication treatment (hydroxychloroquine in varied combinations), while manipulating his clinical research to promote an ineffective, dangerous, and highly expensive drug (remdesivir).

Fauci has also been supporting inflated COVID-19 case counts and reported deaths from the CDC, then using the inflated estimates to justify oppressive public health measures that have no precedent and little or no scientific basis, but add to his influence and power and to the wealth of his globalist associates …

It is time to fire Fauci, to investigate this entire disaster, and to consider what needs to be done to protect the US and the world from future lab-generated pandemic disasters, whether accidental or intentional.”

+ Sources and References

• ^{1, 3, 10, 19} Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery October 19, 2020 (PDF)
• ^2, 20 COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society August 30, 2020 (PDF)
• ^4, 8, 11 Newsweek April 28, 2020
• ⁵ NIH Project Information, Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence
• ⁶ Nature Medicine 2015; 21: 1508-1513
• ⁷ Salon April 24, 2020
• ⁹ The Wall Street Journal August 19, 2020
• ¹² Somebitchtoldme.com Chapter 1: The Corruption of Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus
• ¹³ Breitbart April 10, 2020
• ¹⁴ Fox News March 27, 2020
• ¹⁵ Cell September 3, 2020; 182: 1077-1092 (PDF)
• ¹⁶ CDC.gov August 26, 2020, Comorbidities Table 3, updated October 14, 2020
• ¹⁷ Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352
• ¹⁸ Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery October 19, 2020 (PDF), pages 7 and 8
• ²¹ COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society August 30, 2020 (PDF), pages 36-37

Attachments areaPreview YouTube video Fauci’s Pandemic: How He Caused It and Uses It.Fauci’s Pandemic: How He Caused It and Uses It.

View online version

Bergoglio prays with pagan leaders to their gods – demons again to hasten the global catastropheOn 20 October 2020, a so-called interfaith meeting took place in Rome, where Bergoglio convened representatives of various pagan cults. Then he prayed with them to their gods – demons, one of whom as he believes is also his god, but it is definitely not the true, Triune God. At such events, paganism is placed on the same level as Christianity and is de facto considered an equally valid way to salvation. This is the supreme heresy! It is a false gospel for which one falls under God’s anathema: “If anyone, even an angel from heaven, should preach any other gospel, let him be accursed!” (cf. Gal 1:8-9)The day after this syncretistic meeting, on 21 October 2020, a new documentary film “Francesco” premiered in Rome. About halfway through the film, Francis Bergoglio delivers a monologue in which he says that homosexuals are children of God and have a right to a family. He speaks out in favour of same-sex civil unions so that they may be legally covered, and adds: “I stood up for that.” In doing so, he also approves of same-sex church marriages, the anti-sacrament of marriage promoted by Card. Marx in Germany. The documentary also details an interaction between Bergoglio and a gay man who, together with his so-called partner, adopted three children, want to raise them Catholic but do not know how they will be received by the parish. Francis describes how deeply he was moved by the man’s letter and says that he called him, asking them not to be afraid to take this step and introduce the children to the local parish, thus becoming a new model of the family. Here, for the first time in the history of the Catholic Church, Bergoglio changes its official attitude towards sodomy and speaks in favour of sodomy marriage. For this Bergoglio’s antigospel, God’s multiple curse has already fallen on him (cf. Gal 1:8-9).Prayers with pagans were preceded by Bergoglio’s sermon in the church, where he psychologically presented Christ’s Passion in an engaging manner and analysed the blasphemy of Christ’s enemies in the words, “Save Yourself!” However, the sermon was not aimed to bring people to conversion and true repentance. It was not aimed to encourage people to build a true personal relationship with Jesus, who suffered and died for the sins of each of us. Bergoglio professionally abuses the sensitive subject of Christ’s crucifixion, even speaking of “becoming close to the Lord Jesus,” so that every sincere Catholic must be deeply moved. Bergoglio consciously uses religious rhetoric to establish a reputation as a deeply spiritual man, if not a stigmatic and mystic. It is Bergoglio’s masterful deception, used to manipulate the Christian public. He then makes, not for the first or last time, an apostate gesture of renouncing Christ by uniting with the spirit of paganism and with the demons worshipped by the pagans in common “prayer”. It is a continuation of the apostate path that was revealed most clearly in the enthronement of the Pachamama demon in the Vatican. Martyrs preferred to die rather than to betray Christ. They never prayed with the heathen to their gods – demons!At what time did Bergoglio convene this syncretistic meeting?Organized crime against humanity is taking place worldwide these days, triggering a second wave of artificial pandemic. Real medical experts have expressed themselves clearly against artificial quarantine, face masks and gloves, risky testing, and especially against the new RNA/DNA vaccine for Covid-19. The people speak out, holding demonstrations in the capitals against draconian government measures (London, Berlin, Prague, Bratislava…). There is a struggle going on for salvation from planned genocidal vaccination associated with chipping and aimed at reducing humanity. The major vaccine dealer, Bill Gates, speaks openly about it: “If we do a good job with vaccines, we will reduce the population by 10-15%.” However, before the reduction, vaccines will deprive man of his free will and turn him into a chipped biorobot, for whom, as the Scripture warns, the punishment of the lake of fire is in store.What should a truly orthodox Pope do in this situation? Be the prophetic voice and, as a good shepherd, following the example of Christ, sacrifice even his own life for the flock entrusted to him. He is obliged to rouse not only the Catholic Church but all Christians and the whole world against planned genocide – depopulation associated with vaccination and chipping – and to call for conversion and true repentance. The true Pope should fearlessly demand the punishment of criminals, and thus the cessation of organized international crime. The true Pope, Bergoglio definitely not being one, would be obliged to unmask the fatal dangers of new vaccines. He should stand up for brave doctors who warn of danger and demand that the main culprits be held accountable.Bergoglio does the exact opposite. Ironically, he acts as a specialist in virology and publishes papal documents with the main goal: “Vaccine for everyone.” He is praying with pagans to hasten this global catastrophe, although he hypocritically claims to be praying with them for peace. According to their plan, peace is to occur after the reduction of humanity by 6 billion through vaccines. Bergoglio has thus proved to be a greater philanthropist than Gates and his companions.Repeating like a mantra “in union with Francis our Pope” during the Mass now means to risk one’s own salvation as well as the salvation of the souls entrusted to one’s care. + ElijahPatriarch of the Byzantine Catholic Patriarchate + Methodius OSBMr + Timothy OSBMrSecretary Bishops